Knowledge (XXG)

:Categories for discussion/Log/2016 November 18 - Knowledge (XXG)

Source đź“ť

239:(immediately before deletion at CFD); any admin who G4 deletes a page in that situation either needs to be warned for carelessness or needs to be sanctioned for intentional abuse of the tools. For another thing, DRV is for when there's some problem with the relevant XFD; there was no problem with the relevant CFD, as far as I could tell. Thirdly, you dismiss the primary concern with no good reason; with no evidence, there's no reason to listen to your 1) argument. Bots tend to be programmed to pay attention to categories, rather than to templates. Consider the bot's workflow if it's trained to pay attention to en-0: if it's looking for categories, it will load the category first and strikes all the members from its list of folks to visit, while if it's looking for the template, it will to go WhatLinksHere and find the template, which quite plausibly might be on more than one page in someone's userspace (lots of users put userboxes on a subpage that's then transcluded on the main userpage) and thus confuse the bot if the writer hasn't given it additional training. Maybe someone can find me an example, but I can't remember ever seeing an example of a bot doing anything with templates in userspace, aside from removing them when they've been deleted or otherwise doing work on the template itself — using a template as guidance (aside from 295:
relevant. Also many entries are to be found in that category. It may be that users only appeared because they used the template. But they could also use the category directly. However if users think it is important enough to state incompetence in English in a template, then it is also fair enough to appear as a category. There is quite a big difference between stating the absence of English ability, and the absence of a statement on English ability. It is the latter that we do not need a category for. The fact that bots or message delivery agents could use it is not the only reason to have it, as after all humans can also make use of the category unassisted. Other languages -0 are not nearly so useful on en.wikipedia, because here the preferred communication language is English. I would suggest a modification to Category:User_en-0, that it is no categorised in Category:User_en which suggest that users can speak English. Some other intesting uses are people like User:Jj98 who use Category:User_en-0 and Category:User_en-1, which by the strict wording means that cannot read English but they can write it a bit.
209:
if such a system were used, and 3) Was actually discussed prior as a possible use and dismissed (I cannot currently locate this discussion, although I remember a discussion on that or a similar hypothetical use previously and remember concluding that the userbox template would be sufficient. It may have been in one of the other 0-level category discussions or perhaps a talk page discussion). Ultimately in the proposed hypothetical usage of this category were to come to fruition that bots performed some sort of check to see if the user was a non-English speaker or not, that bot could look for the userbox template. The userbox template is much more likely to be used for non-English speakers anyway due to the ease of using the template system on a userpage.
1888:(If it is "online reliable sources", we are saying they are reliable sources which are online. If it is "reliable online sources", we are saying they are online sources which are reliable. As far as Knowledge (XXG)'s needs are concerned, I don't think either is preferable over the other, but this rename is without prejudice to a rename proposal if someone feels that the other name is better.) 313:"However if users think it is important enough to state incompetence in English in a template, then it is also fair enough to appear as a category" - This has to be some of the worst logic I've heard cited for keeping a category in my 11 years on Knowledge (XXG). Using this logic, no user category that had an associated template would ever be deleted. That flies in the face of 273:
a closure and re-created a category (or any page really, although particularly true for categories where it's hard to imagine the content in said category substantially changing the nature of the category itself) that had different content that didn't actually affect the underlying reasons for deletion.
1701:
again that male category which, in fact, in any case will be deleted ... imho extremely 'de-motivating' for any Wikignome to support further categoration of overwhelming main categories. Hoping your edits will taking care of these related engineers- and other male-related subcategories, good riddance
294:
The link to the conversation prior to restore is in fact the trigger for the earlier restore. It would have just as easily been recreated. The reason I think we should keep this, is first of all it is a user category. So the idea that articles should not be classified as to what they are not is not
272:
if you think the deleting admin should be scolded for their deletion. The two diffs you provide almost certainly qualify as substantially similar - the underlying content being slightly different would be a huge way to game the system to avoid any deletion discussion if someone simply disagreed with
208:
I believe the concerns brought up in the Village Pump post reflect a hypothetical use that 1) Has not and will not actually occur, 2) Can be achieved just as easily by the bot searching for the userbox template indicating a user does not speak English without weakening the user category system even
317:
and basically allows re-creation of every user category ever deleted so long as someone associates it with a template. This would be one of the worst policies we could possibly implement when it comes to user categories. "The fact that bots or message delivery agents could use it is not the only
204:
was brought up at the village pump, requesting reversal of the old CfD (I would submit that this is an inappropriate venue, and this matter should have been brought to DRV so that more pairs of eyes could have commented). With minimal participation, another administrator (whom I asked to reverse
170:
do. This CfD was unanimous & well-participated, and the rationale behind deletion has not changed in the 9 years since then - user categories that categorize people by something they do not do are still useless and help encourage a culture of useless, encyclopedic categories that dilute the
1695:
Closing, now as a personal comment not accepting that any Wikimedian may 'treated' in that way again: In fact, being a long-year Wikignome, and from time to time author but not a Wikibuerocat, above mentioned re-categorization, for me is actually a tiny task to categorize these about :
157:
of such users via the category system is not useful, as it would never be needed to specifically seek out users who do not speak English for an encyclopedia-improving purpose. What is typically done in this scenario is to leave the userbox alone, but simply remove the category from the
267:
Do you have any actual evidence that this category has been used for a bot for such a purpose, or is this still merely a hypothetical? It's been over a year since your argument for it to be restored. Furthermore I think you have a misunderstanding of
1020:
a sub-category of your new category, even though you have just agreed above that some members don't belong in your new category. Please stop acting unilaterally and get a consensus first. Otherwise, what was the point of opening a discussion?
195:
All was well until February 2015, at which point a user re-created the category without any discussion or new arguments as to why the old CfD was not still valid. Shortly thereafter, another user tagged the category for speedy deletion per
890:
Signal estimation is a part of statistical signal processing, but is not synonymous with it. Signal estimation is a notable topic, despite not having an article written about it yet. So I'd be inclined to keep the category as it is.
163: 1651:, by the most time-saving way, i.e. by using mass-move with hotcat, was restarted immediately by wiki-individual categorization following that action. Hence, in fact, I categorized within a handful minutes 249:) for editing that doesn't modify the use of that template is something I've never heard of, and even if it does happen, it's much less common (and thus much less likely to be depended on) by bot-writers. 188: 184: 1919: 1173:
At this point, I no longer know what I agree or disagree with in this confusion. You made a request, pre-emptively actioned it while the request was still being discussed, withdrew the request in the
178: 149:
of deleting this category is that it violates multiple long standing, sound precedents, and ultimately is not a category that can be used for improvement of the encyclopedia in any way, violating
42: 37: 318:
reason to have it, as after all humans can also make use of the category unassisted" - What reason would humans be using this category to specifically seek out non-English speakers?
593:
There are a few people in this category referred to as pioneers (though most are plainly businessmen), but I doubt if these so-called pioneers are suitable to merge to
201: 191:
for a listing of nominations that have followed similar logic of deleting categories based on categorizing users based on them not doing something (also unanimous).
171:
usefulness of the category system to actually be used to foster collaboration on improving articles or otherwise providing some benefit to the enyclopedia.
1334:
necessarily need to be balanced by a corresponding male category. In this case, engineering is a historically-male-dominated occupation, so there is a
21: 601:
to merge them to. So opportunities for merging seem to be limited. Agree that it is subjective and we may well have a further look at the entire tree.
1918:
so the name of this subcategory should include "reliable" to reflect that. Its present name does not reflect exclusion of unreliable online sources.
166:
in 2007 after the community decided that 0-level categories were not useful to the encyclopedia - it isn't useful to group people by something they
1344:... but I am aware of no suggestion that "male engineers in India" are either a rarity or an encyclopedic topic distinct from "engineers in India". 91:
delete. It was too long, but I did read it. The guidelines support deletion, and the arguments for overriding these by retaining it are not strong
1813: 1103: 1079: 997: 910: 836: 1915: 17: 1755: 1624: 1586: 1431: 1391: 1362: 1904: 1647: 1151:
a subcategory", which would have implied I created the category, but that's not what you wrote. I made it a subcat per earlier comments of
974:, which is in line with the headnote of the article saying that this is a topic in the field of Signal processing (not Signal estimation). 1201:
argument makes sense. I shouldn't have been impatient, but still in the new situation I do think that nothing further needs to happen.
971: 932: 1445: 1000:. That rather makes my point, and you have now acted out of process by creating the latter while this discussion is still ongoing. 1900: 534: 1556: 1489: 1805: 1547: 1538: 1341: 1327: 687: 467: 1639: 475: 1787:
per nom. In a male-dominated profession being a female member is notable, but we do not need to split out then men too.
850: 1560: 1511: 1493: 1471: 458: 1931: 1892: 1825: 1796: 1779: 1760: 1730: 1721:; neither one seems particularly useful, and having one for women without one for men is neither balanced nor helpful. 1711: 1629: 1591: 1551: 1542: 1436: 1396: 1367: 1295: 1210: 1188: 1164: 1135: 1115: 1093: 1065: 1032: 1011: 983: 961: 900: 882: 866: 824: 752: 721: 679: 610: 584: 563: 546: 525: 506: 449: 382: 365: 344: 327: 304: 282: 258: 218: 97: 1951: 1873: 1845: 1529: 1276: 1248: 800: 772: 660: 632: 430: 402: 174:
The original nomination above follows a large nomination that effectively put an end to 0-level categories, see here:
78: 740: 695: 187:
for a more comprehensive list of discussions that have unanimously resulted in deleting other 0-level categories, and
1638:
hmmm, back to the facts and no further interpretations of that what another Wikipedian in fact really did by her/his
736: 691: 1574:
If there is consensus to merge this category, I propose to do a group nomination for all the others listed above. --
1502: 1480: 1379:, or be capable of being diffused there, so some diffusion work will be needed after the merger (if it proceeds). -- 1303: 1520: 1145: 1049: 1017: 993: 832: 594: 580: 572: 559: 1515: 1475: 1809: 1751: 1620: 1582: 1497: 1427: 1409: 1387: 1376: 1358: 1346:
Nor is engineering an intrinsically gendered profession, such as acting or most sports, which is why there is no
1307: 300: 1533: 598: 1524: 1506: 1484: 1347: 115: 1792: 1183: 1130: 1088: 1027: 1006: 956: 521: 361: 920: 153:. While I fully admit that knowing if a particular user doesn't speak English can be useful information, a 1206: 1160: 1111: 1061: 979: 928: 878: 862: 717: 606: 542: 378: 1736: 1449: 1318: 1947: 1869: 1841: 1775: 1272: 1244: 896: 796: 768: 748: 656: 628: 576: 555: 426: 398: 162:
The longer version for deleting this category is as follows: First, a brief history. This category was
106: 74: 854: 732: 709: 1744: 1613: 1575: 1420: 1380: 1351: 341: 296: 314: 179:
Knowledge (XXG):User_categories_for_discussion/Archive/March_2007#0-level_categories.2C_part_2_.26_3
150: 123: 1889: 1707: 1292: 676: 446: 94: 1788: 1178: 1125: 1083: 1043: 1022: 1001: 951: 820: 517: 502: 357: 323: 278: 214: 205:
their decision and refused, resulting in me bringing this here) decided to restore the category.
1697:
100 wikis, interrupted just for a short while to take dinner, reading that, but in your's sense
575:. I find this whole tree subjective but some of these may take a more careful selective merge. 1946:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
1840:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
1821: 1726: 1243:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
1202: 1156: 1144:
Apologies for the confusion, I misread your initial comment as "I also see that you have made
1107: 1057: 975: 924: 874: 858: 767:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
713: 627:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
602: 538: 397:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
374: 254: 1868:
Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
1271:
Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
795:
Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
655:
Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
425:
Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
73:
Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
1771: 1152: 892: 873:
Just posted a notification about this discussion at WikiProject Statistics and Engineering.
744: 269: 197: 1927: 1922:
does this. Grammatically I'm not sure if "reliable online" or "online reliable" is right.
947: 338: 243: 356:
says, why would anyone want to use this category to see a list of non-English speakers?
1703: 1606: 1601:. Since creating this nomination, the category has been depopulated out-of-process (in 1914:
The category summary "online sources deemed to be reliable" and has been included in
1053: 816: 498: 353: 319: 274: 210: 1817: 1722: 1612:
Roland zh to repopulate pending the outcome of this consensus-forming discussion. -
516:-- I would be open to having a split by period, but "pioneers" is too subjective. 250: 1452:, and for which there is no corresponding "Male fooers" parent category. See e.g. 373:
per earlier discussion and arguments for keeping the category are not convincing.
1816:
etc (but these categories do not require seperate categories for men and women).
1336: 853:
more clearly and broadly describes the scope of the category, while an article
1923: 1197:
I'm really sorry for this, I got too impatient when realizing that the above
1056:
in 2010 and that is exactly the category that I nominated here for renaming.
533:
per nom. No reason to merge, all articles are somewhere else in the tree of
1862:
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories.
1265:
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories.
789:
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories.
649:
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories.
419:
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories.
67:
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories.
1808:(non-diffusing subcategory) with the women engineers also categorised as 337:. The template is clearly useful, but I see no reason the caategory is. 1177:
of the thread, and then still expect people to follow what is going on.
200:, which was rightly deleted as such. Approximately eight months later, 1375:
Some of these engineers may already be in the by-speciality subcats of
1743:
necessarily need to be balanced by a corresponding male category. --
1920:
Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Anime and manga/Online reliable sources
1804:: For this and similar largely male occupations, have one category 1048:
I did not create this at all, this is clearly a misunderstanding.
597:(because that's an entirely different topic) and we do not have a 1408:. This nomination arises out of a discussion on my talk page at 1770:
merging all as per the arguments put forward by the nominator.
1410:
User talk:BrownHairedGirl#Category:Indian_women_by_occupation
1739:
has been stable for a decade: that a category of women does
1330:, but the guideline is clear that a category of women does 1124:
Exactly what I said you did, and now you agree you did it.
743:
are good targets for the single article in the category. --
1940:
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion.
1834:
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion.
1444:
Further investigation shows a raft of similar subcats of
1237:
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion.
761:
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion.
621:
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion.
391:
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion.
1691: 1688: 1685: 1682: 1679: 1676: 1673: 1670: 1667: 1664: 1661: 1658: 1655: 1652: 1610: 1602: 1414: 1324: 1075: 483: 479: 471: 463: 236: 232: 131: 127: 119: 111: 227:. For one thing, the G4 was inappropriate; G4 is for 1905:
Category:WikiProject lists of online reliable sources
815:
by nominator per comments below. (resulting in keep)
1448:, which also appear not to meet the requirements of 913:
instead, so that this nomination can be regarded as
497:
Largely pov category, pioneer is a subjective term.
1954:). No further edits should be made to this section. 1876:). No further edits should be made to this section. 1848:). No further edits should be made to this section. 1279:). No further edits should be made to this section. 1251:). No further edits should be made to this section. 909:You're actually right. I created a parent category 803:). No further edits should be made to this section. 775:). No further edits should be made to this section. 663:). No further edits should be made to this section. 635:). No further edits should be made to this section. 433:). No further edits should be made to this section. 405:). No further edits should be made to this section. 81:). No further edits should be made to this section. 1646:population of the related sub-categories, mainly 1461:9 categories which appear not to meet WP:CATENDER 235:(at recreation) is significantly different from 950:for instance still fit the renamed category? 8: 1901:Category:WikiProject lists of online sources 1855:Category:WikiProject lists of online sources 352:. I can't see any use for this category; as 1557:Category:Indian male television presenters 1490:Category:Indian male educational theorists 1456: 918: 1548:Category:Indian male television producers 1539:Category:Indian male television directors 688:Category:Uncertainty propagation software 642:Category:Uncertainty propagation software 18:Knowledge (XXG):Categories for discussion 1419:, which led me to find this category. -- 1719:Treat like the women engineers category 1814:Category:19th-century Indian engineers 1155:. If you disagree, I can revert this. 1104:Category:Statistical signal processing 1080:Category:Statistical signal processing 998:Category:Statistical signal processing 911:Category:Statistical signal processing 837:Category:Statistical signal processing 7: 1648:Category:Indian engineers by century 1916:Category:Wikipedia_reliable_sources 1561:Category:Male television presenters 1512:Category:Indian male film directors 1494:Category:Male educational theorists 1472:Category:Indian male choreographers 459:Category:American business pioneers 412:Category:American business pioneers 1552:Category:Male television producers 1543:Category:Male television directors 972:Category:Digital signal processing 28: 1883:The result of the discussion was: 1640:Knowledge (XXG):Assume good faith 1530:Category:Indian male philosophers 1446:Category:Indian men by occupation 1286:The result of the discussion was: 810:The result of the discussion was: 670:The result of the discussion was: 440:The result of the discussion was: 88:The result of the discussion was: 535:Category:American businesspeople 1806:Category:Indian women engineers 1342:Category:Indian women engineers 1328:Category:Indian women engineers 737:Category:Uncertainty of numbers 692:Category:Uncertainty of numbers 1503:Category:Indian male educators 1481:Category:Indian male designers 1304:Category:Indian male engineers 1258:Category:Indian male engineers 1016:I also see that you have made 712:, currently only one article. 1: 1932:08:15, 18 November 2016 (UTC) 1893:02:00, 16 December 2016 (UTC) 1826:03:52, 22 November 2016 (UTC) 1797:17:24, 20 November 2016 (UTC) 1780:03:51, 19 November 2016 (UTC) 1761:08:28, 19 November 2016 (UTC) 1731:23:48, 18 November 2016 (UTC) 1712:19:28, 18 November 2016 (UTC) 1630:18:00, 18 November 2016 (UTC) 1592:11:05, 18 November 2016 (UTC) 1521:Category:Indian male hotelier 1437:10:44, 18 November 2016 (UTC) 1397:10:39, 18 November 2016 (UTC) 1368:10:36, 18 November 2016 (UTC) 1296:01:51, 16 December 2016 (UTC) 867:15:34, 18 November 2016 (UTC) 851:Statistical signal processing 722:17:30, 18 November 2016 (UTC) 680:01:53, 16 December 2016 (UTC) 611:15:55, 27 November 2016 (UTC) 585:15:58, 26 November 2016 (UTC) 564:15:58, 26 November 2016 (UTC) 547:08:30, 26 November 2016 (UTC) 526:17:21, 20 November 2016 (UTC) 507:19:27, 18 November 2016 (UTC) 450:01:54, 16 December 2016 (UTC) 383:08:20, 26 November 2016 (UTC) 366:19:00, 19 November 2016 (UTC) 345:18:51, 19 November 2016 (UTC) 328:01:50, 19 November 2016 (UTC) 305:01:01, 19 November 2016 (UTC) 283:23:57, 18 November 2016 (UTC) 259:23:47, 18 November 2016 (UTC) 219:23:02, 18 November 2016 (UTC) 98:01:56, 16 December 2016 (UTC) 30: 1516:Category:Male film directors 1476:Category:Male choreographers 1211:19:36, 5 December 2016 (UTC) 1189:20:58, 4 December 2016 (UTC) 1165:20:42, 4 December 2016 (UTC) 1136:20:35, 4 December 2016 (UTC) 1116:20:32, 4 December 2016 (UTC) 1094:20:29, 4 December 2016 (UTC) 1066:20:25, 4 December 2016 (UTC) 1033:14:32, 3 December 2016 (UTC) 1012:14:27, 3 December 2016 (UTC) 984:11:12, 3 December 2016 (UTC) 962:00:09, 3 December 2016 (UTC) 901:23:10, 2 December 2016 (UTC) 883:22:10, 2 December 2016 (UTC) 825:19:51, 5 December 2016 (UTC) 753:00:26, 3 December 2016 (UTC) 1498:Category:Male educationists 741:Category:Numerical software 696:Category:Numerical software 1971: 1534:Category:Male philosophers 1146:Category:Signal estimation 1050:Category:Signal estimation 1018:Category:Signal estimation 996:, but not in the proposed 994:Category:Signal estimation 833:Category:Signal estimation 782:Category:Signal estimation 599:Category:Business pioneers 595:Category:American pioneers 573:Category:Pioneers by field 569:Comment/Related Categories 1810:Category:Indian engineers 1377:Category:Indian engineers 1323:This category was created 1308:Category:Indian engineers 946:. Would articles such as 708:to parent categories per 1943:Please do not modify it. 1865:Please do not modify it. 1837:Please do not modify it. 1268:Please do not modify it. 1240:Please do not modify it. 792:Please do not modify it. 764:Please do not modify it. 652:Please do not modify it. 624:Please do not modify it. 571:We have a whole tree of 422:Please do not modify it. 394:Please do not modify it. 70:Please do not modify it. 1525:Category:Male hoteliers 1507:Category:Male educators 1485:Category:Male designers 1348:Category:Male engineers 1912:Nominator's rationale: 1315:Nominator's rationale: 844:Nominator's rationale: 735:and I agree that both 703:Nominator's rationale: 495:Nominator's rationale: 164:nominated for deletion 143:Nominator's rationale: 1052:has been created by 514:Merge back to parent 1644:In fact, I started 1078:edit which created 1642:contributions :-( 1340:case for creating 554:Per Marcocapelle. 107:Category:User en-0 60:Category:User en-0 1759: 1702:male categories, 1628: 1605:) by its creator 1590: 1570: 1569: 1435: 1418: 1395: 1366: 992:So it belongs in 970:It would stay in 936: 923:comment added by 855:Signal estimation 51: 50: 1962: 1945: 1898:Propose renaming 1867: 1839: 1750: 1747: 1735:The guidance at 1619: 1616: 1581: 1578: 1457: 1426: 1423: 1412: 1386: 1383: 1357: 1354: 1270: 1242: 1153:User:Mark viking 1102:Yes, but that's 1074:You didn't make 1047: 830:Propose renaming 794: 766: 654: 626: 577:RevelationDirect 556:RevelationDirect 488: 487: 455:Propose deleting 424: 396: 248: 242: 136: 135: 103:Propose deleting 72: 47: 36: 31: 1970: 1969: 1965: 1964: 1963: 1961: 1960: 1959: 1958: 1952:deletion review 1941: 1890:Good Ol’factory 1874:deletion review 1863: 1857: 1852: 1846:deletion review 1835: 1802:Support merging 1745: 1614: 1609:. I have asked 1576: 1571: 1462: 1421: 1381: 1352: 1301:Propose merging 1293:Good Ol’factory 1277:deletion review 1266: 1260: 1255: 1249:deletion review 1238: 1041: 948:Window function 857:doesn't exist. 801:deletion review 790: 784: 779: 773:deletion review 762: 685:Propose merging 677:Good Ol’factory 661:deletion review 650: 644: 639: 633:deletion review 622: 461: 457: 447:Good Ol’factory 431:deletion review 420: 414: 409: 403:deletion review 392: 297:Graeme Bartlett 246: 240: 202:this discussion 109: 105: 95:Good Ol’factory 79:deletion review 68: 62: 57: 52: 45: 34: 26: 25: 24: 12: 11: 5: 1968: 1966: 1957: 1956: 1936: 1935: 1934: 1909: 1908: 1907: 1879: 1878: 1858: 1856: 1853: 1851: 1850: 1830: 1829: 1828: 1799: 1782: 1765: 1764: 1763: 1716: 1715: 1714: 1694: 1643: 1633: 1632: 1607:User:Roland zh 1595: 1594: 1568: 1567: 1566: 1565: 1564: 1563: 1554: 1545: 1536: 1527: 1518: 1509: 1500: 1487: 1478: 1464: 1463: 1460: 1455: 1454: 1453: 1439: 1402: 1401: 1400: 1399: 1345: 1322: 1312: 1311: 1310: 1282: 1281: 1261: 1259: 1256: 1254: 1253: 1233: 1232: 1231: 1230: 1229: 1228: 1227: 1226: 1225: 1224: 1223: 1222: 1221: 1220: 1219: 1218: 1217: 1216: 1215: 1214: 1213: 1192: 1191: 1168: 1167: 1139: 1138: 1119: 1118: 1097: 1096: 1069: 1068: 1036: 1035: 1014: 987: 986: 965: 964: 940: 939: 938: 937: 904: 903: 885: 870: 869: 841: 840: 839: 806: 805: 785: 783: 780: 778: 777: 757: 756: 755: 725: 724: 700: 699: 698: 666: 665: 645: 643: 640: 638: 637: 617: 616: 615: 614: 613: 588: 587: 566: 549: 528: 510: 509: 492: 491: 490: 489: 436: 435: 415: 413: 410: 408: 407: 387: 386: 385: 368: 347: 332: 331: 330: 308: 307: 288: 287: 286: 285: 262: 261: 193: 192: 181: 160: 159: 140: 139: 138: 137: 84: 83: 63: 61: 58: 56: 53: 49: 48: 40: 29: 27: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 1967: 1955: 1953: 1949: 1944: 1938: 1937: 1933: 1929: 1925: 1921: 1917: 1913: 1910: 1906: 1902: 1899: 1896: 1895: 1894: 1891: 1887: 1884: 1881: 1880: 1877: 1875: 1871: 1866: 1860: 1859: 1854: 1849: 1847: 1843: 1838: 1832: 1831: 1827: 1823: 1819: 1815: 1811: 1807: 1803: 1800: 1798: 1794: 1790: 1789:Peterkingiron 1786: 1783: 1781: 1777: 1773: 1769: 1766: 1762: 1757: 1753: 1749: 1742: 1738: 1734: 1733: 1732: 1728: 1724: 1720: 1717: 1713: 1709: 1705: 1700: 1692: 1689: 1686: 1683: 1680: 1677: 1674: 1671: 1668: 1665: 1662: 1659: 1656: 1653: 1650: 1649: 1641: 1637: 1636: 1635: 1634: 1631: 1626: 1622: 1618: 1611: 1608: 1604: 1600: 1597: 1596: 1593: 1588: 1584: 1580: 1573: 1572: 1562: 1558: 1555: 1553: 1549: 1546: 1544: 1540: 1537: 1535: 1531: 1528: 1526: 1522: 1519: 1517: 1513: 1510: 1508: 1504: 1501: 1499: 1495: 1491: 1488: 1486: 1482: 1479: 1477: 1473: 1470: 1469: 1468: 1467: 1466: 1465: 1459: 1458: 1451: 1447: 1443: 1440: 1438: 1433: 1429: 1425: 1416: 1411: 1407: 1404: 1403: 1398: 1393: 1389: 1385: 1378: 1374: 1371: 1370: 1369: 1364: 1360: 1356: 1349: 1343: 1339: 1338: 1333: 1329: 1325: 1320: 1316: 1313: 1309: 1305: 1302: 1299: 1298: 1297: 1294: 1290: 1287: 1284: 1283: 1280: 1278: 1274: 1269: 1263: 1262: 1257: 1252: 1250: 1246: 1241: 1235: 1234: 1212: 1208: 1204: 1200: 1196: 1195: 1194: 1193: 1190: 1187: 1186: 1182: 1181: 1176: 1172: 1171: 1170: 1169: 1166: 1162: 1158: 1154: 1150: 1147: 1143: 1142: 1141: 1140: 1137: 1134: 1133: 1129: 1128: 1123: 1122: 1121: 1120: 1117: 1113: 1109: 1105: 1101: 1100: 1099: 1098: 1095: 1092: 1091: 1087: 1086: 1081: 1077: 1073: 1072: 1071: 1070: 1067: 1063: 1059: 1055: 1054:User:Melcombe 1051: 1045: 1044:Spinningspark 1040: 1039: 1038: 1037: 1034: 1031: 1030: 1026: 1025: 1019: 1015: 1013: 1010: 1009: 1005: 1004: 999: 995: 991: 990: 989: 988: 985: 981: 977: 973: 969: 968: 967: 966: 963: 960: 959: 955: 954: 949: 945: 944:Probably keep 942: 941: 934: 930: 926: 922: 916: 912: 908: 907: 906: 905: 902: 898: 894: 889: 886: 884: 880: 876: 872: 871: 868: 864: 860: 856: 852: 848: 845: 842: 838: 834: 831: 828: 827: 826: 822: 818: 814: 811: 808: 807: 804: 802: 798: 793: 787: 786: 781: 776: 774: 770: 765: 759: 758: 754: 750: 746: 742: 738: 734: 730: 727: 726: 723: 719: 715: 711: 707: 704: 701: 697: 693: 689: 686: 683: 682: 681: 678: 674: 671: 668: 667: 664: 662: 658: 653: 647: 646: 641: 636: 634: 630: 625: 619: 618: 612: 608: 604: 600: 596: 592: 591: 590: 589: 586: 582: 578: 574: 570: 567: 565: 561: 557: 553: 550: 548: 544: 540: 536: 532: 529: 527: 523: 519: 518:Peterkingiron 515: 512: 511: 508: 504: 500: 496: 493: 485: 481: 477: 473: 469: 465: 460: 456: 453: 452: 451: 448: 444: 441: 438: 437: 434: 432: 428: 423: 417: 416: 411: 406: 404: 400: 395: 389: 388: 384: 380: 376: 372: 369: 367: 363: 359: 358:Peter coxhead 355: 351: 348: 346: 343: 340: 336: 333: 329: 325: 321: 316: 312: 311: 310: 309: 306: 302: 298: 293: 290: 289: 284: 280: 276: 271: 266: 265: 264: 263: 260: 256: 252: 245: 238: 234: 230: 226: 223: 222: 221: 220: 216: 212: 206: 203: 199: 190: 186: 182: 180: 177: 176: 175: 172: 169: 165: 156: 152: 148: 144: 141: 133: 129: 125: 121: 117: 113: 108: 104: 101: 100: 99: 96: 92: 89: 86: 85: 82: 80: 76: 71: 65: 64: 59: 54: 44: 41: 39: 33: 32: 23: 19: 1942: 1939: 1911: 1897: 1885: 1882: 1864: 1861: 1836: 1833: 1801: 1784: 1767: 1740: 1737:WP:CATGENDER 1718: 1698: 1645: 1599:Depopulation 1598: 1450:WP:CATGENDER 1441: 1405: 1372: 1335: 1331: 1319:WP:CATGENDER 1314: 1300: 1288: 1285: 1267: 1264: 1239: 1236: 1203:Marcocapelle 1198: 1184: 1179: 1174: 1157:Marcocapelle 1148: 1131: 1126: 1108:Marcocapelle 1089: 1084: 1058:Marcocapelle 1028: 1023: 1007: 1002: 976:Marcocapelle 957: 952: 943: 925:Marcocapelle 919:— Preceding 914: 887: 875:Marcocapelle 859:Marcocapelle 846: 843: 829: 812: 809: 791: 788: 763: 760: 728: 714:Marcocapelle 705: 702: 684: 672: 669: 651: 648: 623: 620: 603:Marcocapelle 568: 551: 539:Marcocapelle 530: 513: 494: 454: 442: 439: 421: 418: 393: 390: 375:Marcocapelle 370: 349: 334: 291: 237:this content 233:this content 228: 224: 207: 194: 173: 167: 161: 154: 146: 142: 102: 90: 87: 69: 66: 1772:Shyamsunder 1603:these edits 1559:... but no 1550:... but no 1541:... but no 1532:... but no 1523:... but no 1514:... but no 1505:... but no 1492:... but no 1483:... but no 1474:... but no 1337:prima facie 893:Mark viking 745:Mark viking 733:WP:SMALLCAT 710:WP:SMALLCAT 55:November 18 43:November 19 38:November 17 1748:HairedGirl 1617:HairedGirl 1579:HairedGirl 1424:HairedGirl 1384:HairedGirl 1355:HairedGirl 342:Od Mishehu 315:WP:USERCAT 151:WP:USERCAT 1948:talk page 1870:talk page 1842:talk page 1704:Roland zh 1699:populated 1415:permalink 1326:to match 1273:talk page 1245:talk page 915:withdrawn 813:Withdrawn 797:talk page 769:talk page 657:talk page 629:talk page 537:already. 427:talk page 399:talk page 339:עוד מישהו 270:WP:CSD#G4 198:WP:CSD#G4 183:See also 75:talk page 1950:or in a 1872:or in a 1844:or in a 1756:contribs 1625:contribs 1587:contribs 1432:contribs 1392:contribs 1363:contribs 1275:or in a 1247:or in a 1180:Spinning 1127:Spinning 1085:Spinning 1024:Spinning 1003:Spinning 953:Spinning 933:contribs 921:unsigned 817:VegaDark 799:or in a 771:or in a 659:or in a 631:or in a 499:Idenitor 429:or in a 401:or in a 354:VegaDark 320:VegaDark 275:VegaDark 211:VegaDark 158:userbox. 155:grouping 77:or in a 20:‎ | 1886:rename. 1818:Hugo999 1768:Support 1723:Nyttend 729:Support 706:upmerge 472:history 251:Nyttend 229:reposts 120:history 1752:(talk) 1621:(talk) 1583:(talk) 1428:(talk) 1388:(talk) 1359:(talk) 1175:middle 847:rename 552:Delete 531:Delete 443:delete 371:Delete 350:Delete 335:Delete 244:nobots 231:, and 168:do not 1924:Ranze 1785:Merge 1746:Brown 1693:etc. 1615:Brown 1577:Brown 1442:Note2 1422:Brown 1382:Brown 1353:Brown 1289:merge 1185:Spark 1132:Spark 1090:Spark 1029:Spark 1008:Spark 958:Spark 673:merge 480:watch 476:links 147:tl;dr 128:watch 124:links 46:: --> 16:< 1928:talk 1822:talk 1812:and 1793:talk 1776:talk 1727:talk 1708:talk 1406:Note 1317:per 1207:talk 1199:keep 1161:talk 1112:talk 1076:this 1062:talk 980:talk 929:talk 897:talk 888:Keep 879:talk 863:talk 821:talk 749:talk 739:and 731:per 718:talk 694:and 607:talk 581:talk 560:talk 543:talk 522:talk 503:talk 484:logs 468:talk 464:edit 379:talk 362:talk 324:talk 301:talk 292:Keep 279:talk 255:talk 225:Keep 215:talk 189:here 185:here 145:The 132:logs 116:talk 112:edit 35:< 1903:to 1754:• ( 1741:not 1696:--> 1623:• ( 1585:• ( 1496:or 1430:• ( 1390:• ( 1361:• ( 1332:not 1306:to 835:to 690:to 22:Log 1930:) 1824:) 1795:) 1778:) 1729:) 1710:) 1690:, 1687:, 1684:, 1681:, 1678:, 1675:, 1672:, 1669:, 1666:, 1663:, 1660:, 1657:, 1654:, 1373:PS 1350:. 1291:. 1209:) 1163:) 1149:as 1114:) 1106:. 1082:? 1064:) 982:) 935:) 931:• 917:. 899:) 891:-- 881:) 865:) 849:, 823:) 751:) 720:) 675:. 609:) 583:) 562:) 545:) 524:) 505:) 482:| 478:| 474:| 470:| 466:| 445:. 381:) 364:) 326:) 303:) 281:) 257:) 247:}} 241:{{ 217:) 130:| 126:| 122:| 118:| 114:| 93:. 1926:( 1820:( 1791:( 1774:( 1758:) 1725:( 1706:( 1627:) 1589:) 1434:) 1417:) 1413:( 1394:) 1365:) 1321:. 1205:( 1159:( 1110:( 1060:( 1046:: 1042:@ 978:( 927:( 895:( 877:( 861:( 819:( 747:( 716:( 605:( 579:( 558:( 541:( 520:( 501:( 486:) 462:( 377:( 360:( 322:( 299:( 277:( 253:( 213:( 134:) 110:(

Index

Knowledge (XXG):Categories for discussion
Log
November 17
November 19
talk page
deletion review
Good Ol’factory
01:56, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
Category:User en-0
edit
talk
history
links
watch
logs
WP:USERCAT
nominated for deletion
Knowledge (XXG):User_categories_for_discussion/Archive/March_2007#0-level_categories.2C_part_2_.26_3
here
here
WP:CSD#G4
this discussion
VegaDark
talk
23:02, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
this content
this content
nobots
Nyttend
talk

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.

↑