Legality of Cannabis by U.S. Jurisdiction

< November 23 November 25 >

November 24[edit]

Category:Drugs for impotency[edit]

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 result of the discussion was: Merge. Timrollpickering 19:59, 2 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: The former category is a duplicate of the latter, with impotency redirecting to erectile dysfunction. Brandmeistertalk 23:19, 24 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Ambiguous meaning here. Depending on context, impotency can refer to either chronic erectile dysfunction, or to male infertility. Which condition are these drugs treating? Dimadick (talk) 12:46, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • Everything currently in the category is about erectile dysfunction. WhatamIdoing (talk) 06:30, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • support--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 11:39, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • support Bondegezou (talk) 12:14, 26 November 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.

Category:Castlebar Song Contest[edit]

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 result of the discussion was: Delete. Timrollpickering 19:58, 2 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:OCASSOC ("This Category is created for to link people places and songs associated with ...") and is clearly non-defining e.g. for Terry Wogan or RTE.  Note: The eponymous article may need to be upmerged. DexDor (talk) 20:16, 24 November 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.

Category:Skeptical Wikipedians[edit]

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 result of the discussion was: Delete. Timrollpickering 19:52, 1 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: First off, this category was deleted before and I do not believe the reasons for deletion have changed. Therefore, I think this could rightly be deleted as re-creation of previously deleted content, but I decided to err on the side of caution and nominate this regularly because this was re-created back in 2012 and has apparently been overlooked since then. I don't think the original reasons for deletion has changed since its first nomination - this category violates WP:USERCAT in that it can not reasonably be expected to foster collaboration. There is already Category:WikiProject Skepticism members for users who wish to actually collaborate. Grouping users in a category who self-describe as skeptics serves no encyclopedic purpose as it is unrealistic to suggest that such users could be expected to share the same interests on a subject to collaborate on solely by being skeptics. VegaDark (talk) 19:49, 24 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
In addition to being in this category I'm also a member of a fairly lively Facebook group with 50+ members that has exactly this unrealistic. It's been going for over 5 years now. 1Veertje (talk) 19:59, 24 November 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.

Category:Bunch AfC submissions by user[edit]

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 result of the discussion was: Delete. Timrollpickering 19:51, 1 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: There is absolutely no point in this page as it always contained User:Sander.v.Ginkel/drafts waiting for approval which dates all the way back to late-2016 and there is no such thing as "Bunch AfC submissions" so this is a useless maintenance category. Pkbwcgs (talk) 16:13, 24 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete useless. Every page is ether gone or back in mainspace. Legacypac (talk) 16:31, 24 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, useless cat. Flooded with them hundreds 07:05, 25 November 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.

Category:Regulations by political parties[edit]

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 result of the discussion was: Delete. Timrollpickering 19:51, 1 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Only one article, which is quite satisfactorily in Category:Organization of the Communist Party of China. It doesnt seem likely that we we will get a lot more articles in the category. Rathfelder (talk) 14:56, 24 November 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.

Category:American wives[edit]

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 result of the discussion was: administrative close: as noted category was deleted per WP:G5. Good Ol’factory (talk) 23:45, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: delete, wife is not a defining characteristic, articles should not be directly in this category. The subCategory:First Ladies of the United States should be moved to Category:Wives which may be kept as a container category. Marcocapelle (talk) 14:03, 24 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, created by a confirmed sock Ash Carol (talk · contribs); requesting speedy. power~enwiki (π, ν) 17:20, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Since the vast majority of women married at some point in their lives, but except for First Ladies people aren't notable for being wives otherwise, this would be a non-defining and unmaintainable category for upwards of 90 per cent of all articles we have about female people at all. Bearcat (talk) 17:38, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Update the nominated category has been deleted per WP:G5 as well. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:33, 25 November 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.

Category:Husbands[edit]

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 result of the discussion was: administrative close: as noted categories were deleted per WP:G5. Good Ol’factory (talk) 23:45, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge/delete, husband is not a defining characteristic. Marcocapelle (talk) 13:28, 24 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, created by a confirmed sock Ash Carol (talk · contribs); requesting speedy. power~enwiki (π, ν) 17:20, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Since the vast majority of men married at some point in their lives, but people aren't notable for being husbands per se, this would be a non-defining and unmaintainable category for upwards of 90 per cent of all articles we have about male people at all. Bearcat (talk) 17:37, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Update both categories have been deleted per WP:G5. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:34, 25 November 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.

Category:Far-right politics in Brazil[edit]

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 result of the discussion was: speedy keep. In fact, since the only non-sock delete vote is an obvious templated comment not clearly meant for this discussion and only linking to the general informational page on policies, I'm closing this per WP:SNOW and WP:EVASION. If anyone who is not banned has a good reason to suggest deletion of this category, please start a new discussion. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 16:07, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This category will most likely only ever contain one person. As per WP:SMALLCAT and WP:OVERCAT), there is no need to keep it. Besides, its a contentious category being described as controversial and disputed in the talk page of Jair Bolsonaro (WP:OPINIONCAT). WooliesOS (talk) 06:35, 24 November 2018 (UTC) (sockpuppet comment struck Ivanvector (Talk/Edits))[reply]
Several of the comments were also placed here by sockpuppets using spoofed signatures. I have removed them. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 16:05, 26 November 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.
source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2018_November_24