Wikipedia:User categories for discussion

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was speedily deleted.--Mike Selinker 04:24, 12 December 2006 (UTC) Recreation of deleted content. Wikipedia:User_categories_for_discussion/Archive/October_2006#October 7.--Mike Selinker 18:48, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was deleted both (empty).--Mike Selinker 04:28, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Category:Wikipedians who think this is not a laughing matter and Category:Wikipedians who don't think forever's fun - only members of each category are the userbox and the categories' creator (the same Person created both). They are "not" categories, but beyond that, I think I'm missing a cultural reference... (Not opposed to merging or a rename, if these categories are more than what they state...) - jc37 00:42, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

• Delete - as nominator. - jc37 00:42, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
• Merge to whatever's being referenced. I wish I could remember what is being referenced, but there is definitely a cultural reference you're missing. -Amarkov ^blah_edits 01:40, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. I think the first one is from the standard spam email from Nigeria. Don't know for sure, though. Anyway, they're both empty, so I put a bullet in 'em.--Mike Selinker 04:28, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was speedily merged.--Mike Selinker 16:38, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Speedy Merge Category:Wikipedians who love WWE to Category:Wikipedians who like WWE - per consistancy. - jc37 01:15, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

• Speedy Merge - as nominator. - jc37 01:15, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was speedily renamed.--Mike Selinker 16:38, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Speedy Merge Category:Wikipedians who like hockey to Category:Wikipedian hockey fans - jc37 01:10, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

• Speedy Merge - as nominator. - jc37 01:10, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was speedily renamed.--Mike Selinker 16:38, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Category:Wikipedians who are fans of the Chicago Cubs to Category:Wikipedian Chicago Cubs fans per consistancy. - jc37 00:35, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

• Speedy Merge - as nominator. - jc37 00:35, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was speedily deleted.--Mike Selinker 16:38, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Category:Wikipedian who think Mozilla Firefox sucks - Empty, and a "not" category. - jc37 23:54, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

• Speedy Delete - as nominator. - jc37 23:54, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. even though firefox does in fact "suck", per nom

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was speedily renamed.--Mike Selinker 16:38, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Speedy Rename Category:Wikipedian Elfmaniacs to Category:Wikipedians who listen to Danny Elfman, per consistancy of Category:Wikipedians by musician. - jc37 23:34, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

• Speedy Rename - as nominator. - jc37 23:34, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
• Speedy Rename - as creator of the userbox. -Releeshan 23:36, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was speedily merged (fixed the one errant template per many precedents).--Mike Selinker 06:23, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Merge Category:Monty Python fans to Category:Wikipedians who like Monty Python - Per previous discussions and standard. Ultimately, a duplicate.--WaltCip 01:29, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was speedily deleted per creator's request.-Mike Selinker 06:48, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
Category:Wikipedians with PGP/GPG keys into Category:Wikipedians who use PGP

• Merge, I created the former category not knowing that the latter existed. I changed the link in {{user PGP}} to point to the latter, and in no longer makes sense to have two. Avi 14:31, 24 November 2006 (UTC) reposted from CfD by Andrew c 02:13, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was speedily deleted (empty).--Mike Selinker 17:14, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Category:Wikipedians interested in dystheism - Currently empty. (Previous members were only the userbox that was apparently supposed to populate it, and Category:Dystheist Wikipedians as a sub-cat - which seems to be the naming convention of the other categories in Category:Wikipedians by religion.) Note: this is the only "interested in" category in Wikipedians by Religion. - jc37 16:01, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

• Delete - as nominator. - jc37 16:01, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom, and per Mike Selinker's previous discussions regarding the nonexistent difference between "being" and "being interested in."--WaltCip 21:01, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was delete.--Mike Selinker 18:55, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Category:Wikipedians who don't give a fuck - While I appreciate such a sentiment, I don't think a category is needed for this. (I found this while reading through an arbcom nominee's user contributions.) - jc37 16:34, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Delete - as nominator. - jc37 16:34, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

• Frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn. Delete.--WaltCip 21:52, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

• Comment Actually, I think we need to dig deeper into the roots and delete the essay through which the userbox was founded.--WaltCip 01:06, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

• If that's your intention, try Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion : ) - jc37 08:09, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

• Delete - inflammatory and unuseful; Wikipedians who don't give a **** about what? --Gray Porpoise_{Your wish is my command!} 11:55, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete I think it's trying to say 'Don't take things on Wikipedia too seriously', but right now it's just rather inflammatory. I'm a little neutral about MfDing the essay, though - I can vaguely relate to the sentiment... riana_dzasta 13:07, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, who gives a fuck? —ptk✰fgs 17:19, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
• Keep - Because...okay? You don't have to have this userbox; but perhaps others might wish to express themselves in this ironic fashion. Have any of you read the essay? These reactions seem rather of the "knee-jerk" variety, in my humble. -- weirdoactor ^t|c -- 00:00, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

  Please take a moment to read the name of this page, and its introduction. This has nothing to do with the userbox, merely the associated category. - jc37 14:37, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

  jc37: while I can appreciate your having appointed yourself "Minister Of Category Deletion", please understand that a) I read and understood that "this" has "nothing" to do with the userbox, and b) I voted to keep the category, not the userbox; your "ownership" of this page notwithstanding. Thanks! -- weirdoactor ^t|c -- 15:44, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

  To clarify, your comment was: "You don't have to have this userbox; but perhaps others might wish to express themselves in this ironic fashion." - So I felt (and feel) that offering a friendly notice that this isn't about the userbox was appropriate. Now as for the rest of your comments. Please consider your tone, I believe that you're coming rather close to WP:NPA. As for "Minister of category deletion", well, in a word: wow. I suppose I could suggest that you look over the various nominations over the last couple weeks and see quite a few merges, and renames as well, but I think I'll just offer a counter name suggestion: "Participant in WP:UCFD". We (note the we) are trying to clean up all the subcategories of Category:Wikipedians. The goal of a User category is: collaboration, and/or usefulness in grouping together Wikipedians. If the only reason for a category is as a notice, then the category should be deleted/renamed/merged. And I think I should apologise to User:Mike Selinker, since if anyone should have the dubious appelation of page ownership, or even Minister, it should be his : ) - He's done an AWESOME job at helping develop consensus on these related categories, and deserves the majority of the accolades (though, as I said, dubious they may be : ) - jc37 14:37, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

• Comment - Yes, I did see the essay. And WP:NOT is not a sufficient argument. "Not censored" doesn't mean using an expletive every three words. Could you at least clean the thing? It's prone to vandalism--WaltCip 00:57, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

  You..."saw" the essay. I once "saw" a copy of "The Iliad" in the original Greek; this does not mean I read it...heh. And as for the category being "prone to vandalism"; this describes approximately 85% of the categories on Wikipedia. The category is a plea for apathy in regards to the jerks on runs into on Wikipedia; not apathy TOWARD Wikipedia; as evidenced by this statement: In short: don't be a grumpy-pants, full of apathy, but remain distanced from arguments that are passionate. I can understand why you object to the language used; but as I respect your right to keep and bear arms, please respect the rights of others to express themselves in a manner in which you do not approve. Thanks! -- weirdoactor ^t|c -- 15:44, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

  Would you condone a category that said Category:Wikipedians who banged their girlfriend?--WaltCip 22:31, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

  We aren't discussing that category; we are discussing Category:Wikipedians who don't give a fuck. I have a problem with the word "condone", as it speaks to "ownership" and "approval", which should not be part of the equation here. And just curious...would you condone a category for Category:Wikipedians who protected their girlfriend using a firearm? -- weirdoactor ^t|c -- 22:46, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

  No.--WaltCip 01:10, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

• Delete. This category doesn't really mean anything; I mean, Wikipedians who don't give a fuck about what? Anthony Rupert 01:44, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete - Wikipedia does not exist to provide users with a way for them to express themselves. If the category doesn't aid in collaboration, it should go. —Cswrye 16:46, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Does not facilitate collaboration or community-building.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 17:00, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per above. Cbrown1023 23:41, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Personally, I'm surprised at the passionate reaction because... well, you know.--Mike Selinker 17:14, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
• Comment. Also, Wikipedia:Profanity states the following. "Words and images that might be considered offensive, profane, or obscene by other Wikipedia readers should be used if and only if their omission would cause the article to be less informative, relevant, or accurate, and no equally suitable alternatives are available. Including information about offensive material is part of Wikipedia's encyclopedic mission; being offensive is not." This category doesn't pass the test.--WaltCip 19:29, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was rename all.--Mike Selinker 18:55, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

• Category:Fans of YuYu Hakusho to Category:Wikipedians who like YuYu Hakusho
• Category:Fans of Dragon Ball Z to Category:Wikipedians who like Dragon Ball Z
• Category:Fans of Rurouni Kenshin to Category:Wikipedians who like Rurouni Kenshin

Per Category: Wikipedians interested in anime and manga.--Mike Selinker 12:35, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

• Delete Rename per consistancy. - jc37 21:23, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
• Rename per nom in good faith. A deletion in rename nom shouldn't be made unless a point can be proven other than consistency.--WaltCip 21:56, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

  Thanks for catching that : ) - I obviously meant "rename". (How does one delete per consistancy? : ) - jc37 22:06, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was rename to Category:Wikipedians who use Encyclopaedia Metallum.--Mike Selinker 18:55, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Rename to Category:Wikipedians who use Encyclopaedia Metallum per Category:Wikipedians by website.--Mike Selinker 11:02, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

• Rename per consistancy. - jc37 21:23, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was speedy rename per many precedents.--Mike Selinker 10:53, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Rename to Category:WikiProject Caucasia members, convention of Category:Wikipedians by WikiProject. -- ProveIt ^(talk) 03:43, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was delete.--Mike Selinker 17:34, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
We just deleted "Space Wikipedians" and "Wikipedians with Lunar citizenship", so this should go too.--Mike Selinker 22:24, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

• Delete - It would be suprising if we really had Martians editing, especially since the life forms that may exist on Mars would be too simple to edit or even reach Earth on their own! ;) --Gray Porpoise_{Your wish is my command!} 23:50, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. VegaDark 03:49, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. - jc37 21:23, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom... but what about Wikipedians from Mars, Alabama?--WaltCip 21:53, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom, although judging by some of the stuff you see on NPP, some people just might be on a different planet... riana_dzasta 13:08, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was rename to category:Wikipedians with usernames with unsupported titles.--Mike Selinker 17:34, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

• Category:Subpages or main pages of users with unsupported titles to Category:Wikipedians with usernames with unsupported titles. Or something.--Mike Selinker 16:16, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
• Rename to Category:Wikipedian usernames with unsupported titles. - jc37 16:24, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
• Rename, as current sounds awkward and does not contain "Wikipedian", standard for all user categories except Babel. --Gray Porpoise_{Your wish is my command!} 23:50, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
• Comment - This category "technically" isn't a list of users, but rather is a list of usernames. It's a minor distinction, but I think it's worth mentioning : ) - jc37 22:10, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Noted. I think any miscategorized page can adapt.--Mike Selinker 17:34, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was rename to Category:WikiProject My Chemical Romance members.--Mike Selinker 17:34, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
Category:Members of WikiProject My Chemical Romance to Category:WikiProject My Chemical Romance members per standard of Category:Wikipedians by WikiProject.--Mike Selinker 15:38, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

• Speedy Rename per previous discussions. - jc37 16:24, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
• Rename to Category:WikiProject My Chemical Romance participants. I still have the belief that "participants" sounds more welcoming than "members", where the otherwise sounds like a clique.--WaltCip 02:14, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  • I agree, but we've settled that issue by our hippocratic rename to "members" and "participants" in that category.--Mike Selinker 17:34, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was rename all.--Mike Selinker 18:44, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

• Category:Wikipedians that edit the Uruguayan Portal to category:Wikipedians who maintain the Uruguayan Portal
• Category:Wikipedians plugged into the Energy Portal to category:Wikipedians who maintain the Energy Portal
• Category:Wikipedians who Help Maintain Portal:Mario to category:Wikipedians who maintain the Mario Portal
• Category:Wikipedians who Help Maintain a Portal to category:Wikipedians by portal
• Category:Wikipedians who Maintain Portal:RuneScape to category:Wikipedians who maintain the RuneScape Portal

The Uruguauyan one was nominated below, but I felt they should be considered as a group. Not sure if this is the best wording, though.--Mike Selinker 05:09, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

• Comment - I'm kind of looking forward to a discussion on these. On one hand, technically they are roughly a part of an associated WikiProject. On the other hand, It may be useful to know who actively helps with a portal. I also think "help maintain" is better than just "maintain", but I agree that other wording options would be welcome. - jc37 08:04, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
• Rename for consistency. --Gray Porpoise_{Your wish is my command!} 23:50, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
• Rename per nom, wording seems OK. riana_dzasta 13:10, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
• Leave When setting up Category:Wikipedians plugged into the Energy Portal, I did consider setting up a WikiProject but decided that this might be too formal, especially as there is already an Energy WikiProject. Instead I deliberatly opted for an 'interested group of contributors to the portal & topics' rather than a 'group of maintainers & administrators of the portal'. This is reflected in the name of the collaboration and in the suggested ways in which people may wish to help on the Energy Portal talk page. By changing the name in the way proposed, uniformity would be gained, but the original intention would be distorted. So, for the Energy Portal, upgrading the existing informal 'collaboration' to a formal 'WikiProject:Energy Portal' would be closest to the origial intention, if uniformity must win. But why not leave alone and use the Category:Wikipedians by portal for navigation, expanding it to include all the other collaborations, individuals and WikiProjects (which, of course, don't generally call themselves 'Maintainers of Portal X') that maintain or contribute to portals, starting with those listed in the Portal Directory. Gralo 15:02, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
• Rename all for consistency with similar categories. —Cswrye 17:51, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.