Wikipedia talk:Category deletion

This is the talk page of a redirect that targets the page:
• Wikipedia:Categories for discussion
Because this page is not frequently watched, present and future discussions, edit requests and requested moves should take place at:
• Wikipedia talk:Categories for discussion

Archives

Archive 1

Proposal to move to Wikipedia:Category deletion and demote from policy status or merge altogether

This is really a documentation page on the fairly uncontroversial process of category deletions; there is no need to have this as a policy or even as a guideline. It's already dependent on the deletion policy, speedy deletion policy, which covers all policy aspects, and on the deletion process guideline. Actually, the content is largely redundant and could be merged in the Wikipedia:Categories for discussion page and its Admin instructions subpage. We don't have a files for deletion policy or similar for other namespaces, and I don't see the need for categories. Cenarium (talk) 11:00, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Makes sense to me. It certainly looks weird having it marked as a policy.--Kotniski (talk) 11:39, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A good other part of this is redundant with the CSD too I think. It seems, as far as I can tell, that this came about as a summary of other policies[1], and since then has not moved much further beyond that. It should have clearly redundant text chopped (which may be everything), and the rest merged. M 14:41, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I also agree with removing the "policy" status. Obviously that would include a namechange for this page. And may I ask you to comment on my proposal in the section above this one. Thank you. Debresser (talk) 21:16, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Change to infopage I would support that you change it to infopage.Smallman12q (talk) 20:22, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Infopages are, or should be, used for standard uninterpretable information. I think it might be better to just kill that infopage template, it would make things easier. This page gives instructions on a preferred way to do things, so infopage probably isn't appropriate. M 22:49, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done With no-one supporting policy status for this page, I think it's time to remove the tag and rename the page.--Kotniski (talk) 12:59, 2 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Late to the party, but I support this change as well. Pcap ping 08:26, 3 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I propose to finally redirect it to Wikipedia:Categories for discussion. The paragraph on closing is outdated and superseded by Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Administrator instructions, the one on Speedy renaming and speedy merging is the same as the one there (both transcluded from Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Speedy criteria). The important parts of the (outdated) paragraph on the speedy delete policy are also covered there, and the last two sections have been merged just now there in special notes. So it's no longer useful, and redundant now. Cenarium (talk) 01:32, 4 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If someone were to do this seriously, like an offical Help:Merge#Selective_paste_merger, copying or otherwise implementing there what is usefull or well formulated here, then that would be fine with me. Debresser (talk) 07:48, 4 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If all the important information has been moved over to there, then certainly, it makes sense to turn this redundant page into a redirect.--Kotniski (talk) 13:20, 4 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'll be more explicit. I see a lot of crap here. Things that are nowhere to be found in Wikipedia:Categories for discussion and that I for one would not want to be found there. Debresser (talk) 14:56, 4 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have not had time to really consider this proposal. I will say that removal of a policy tag after only two days is a very rash action, even if that may be how the discussion winds up. Vegaswikian (talk) 18:01, 4 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Two days? It was about three weeks.--Kotniski (talk) 11:47, 5 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The policy exists elsewhere, so removing the tag isn't a substantive policy change. If you take the time to consider the proposal, and come up with an objection (for example, finding something in this page that is not already described elsewhere), then bring it up and we can restore the tag. M 22:05, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done, per above, no objections. All useful content had already been merged at the appropriate places. Cenarium (talk) 19:08, 18 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]