Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2005 June 25#Category:Cognitive computer vision

:The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category 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 page.

The result of the debate was no consensus (keep) --Kbdank71 6 July 2005 13:28 (UTC)

Should be merged with :Category:Schools in Ireland which is a more generic category and cover primary and secondary schools, amongst others - and the latter is more appropriately titled. Djegan 19:29, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• Merge and delete - ℬastique▼^talk 21:04, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Merge. James F. (talk) 23:12, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Any reason why this couldn't be renamed and kept as a subcategory of Schools in Ireland? Must be a pretty big category... Grutness...wha? 00:19, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Comment The term "secondary school" in Ireland is accepted as a shortening of "voluntary secondary school" - viz, a particular type of secondary level school and not a precise generic term for all schools at the secondary level. Many of the schools on the category are not of the "secondary school" type, but are of the other types not common until recent in Ireland - often private and commericial type schools which are fee based and not by any means voluntary. Djegan 30 June 2005 23:02 (UTC)
• Keep in favor of more detailed categories. Hall Monitor 30 June 2005 17:34 (UTC)
• Keep Subcategorisation is clearly beneficial; the distinction is clear cut. CalJW 5 July 2005 01:15 (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 page.

:The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category 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 page.

The result of the debate was delete --Kbdank71 6 July 2005 13:26 (UTC)

Unneccessary category. Related article at Disney DVD is listed at votes for deletion.

• Delete, redundant. This is based on the premise (see Disney DVD) that Disney have some mysterious alternateive DVD format, which is plainly untrue. At best, redirect to :Category:Disney films. -Splash 00:06, Jun 26, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Utterly pointless. tregoweth 00:43, Jun 26, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Agree with the above comments. --minghong 04:06, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Novakreo 06:58, 26 Jun 2005 (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 page.

:The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category 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 page.

The result of the debate was no consensus (keep) --Kbdank71 6 July 2005 13:24 (UTC)

Only one article in the category and it's difficult to think of any potential other articles to put in it. David | Talk 16:39, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• Delete virtually-empty category on the understanding that there are no other elections specific to NYC (I don't know the American political structure too well...).-Splash 17:40, Jun 25, 2005 (UTC)
• Weak keep. The current article on the recent two elections can be split into two articles and be expanded. More articles on past elections can be expected to be created. — Instantnood June 28, 2005 16:11 (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 page.

:The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category 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 page.

The result of the debate was delete --Kbdank71 6 July 2005 13:18 (UTC)

There had been only one article in this category. Now empty. Delete - SoM 15:07, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• Delete This is a very unneccessary category, good catch. Hiding 15:35, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Delete unnecessary category. -Splash 17:39, Jun 25, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete I had to do a double-take, because I was working on a Captain Marvel article, and had never seen this category....then I realized, it's this Captain Marvel that they're talking about. --FuriousFreddy 18:53, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. James F. (talk) 23:12, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Have no fear, Wonder Dog is here.. ← That's a Delete <>Who?¿? 04:24, 27 Jun 2005 (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 page.

:The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category 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 page.

The result of the debate was rename --Kbdank71 6 July 2005 13:16 (UTC)

Mis-named and unneeded category. In terms of peerages, "dormant" refers to titles which are unclaimed, but in theory could be claimed. The titles in this category are extinct–because there are no legal heirs, whether through death or forfeiture. This category is thus mis-named. I don't see a pressing need for a sub-category of :Category:Dukedoms for those dukedoms which are no longer extant. Mackensen (talk) 14:02, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• Delete. john k 14:45, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Rename to Extinct dukedoms. I count 25/60 (approx) of the Dukedoms with WP articles in this category. That's surely enough for a subcategory?-Splash 14:47, Jun 25, 2005 (UTC)
• If so, then "Dukedoms" should not be capitalized, though. Radiantmeta:mergist 14:54, Jun 25, 2005 (UTC)
• Yes, I agree so I tweaked my vote a bit.-Splash 17:35, Jun 25, 2005 (UTC)
• Rename to "Extinct dukedoms". James F. (talk) 23:12, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Rename "Extinct dukedoms" as per reasons name above. Hiding 28 June 2005 12:39 (UTC)
• Rename as suggested. Hall Monitor 30 June 2005 17:36 (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 page.

:The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category 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 page.

The result of the debate was delete --Kbdank71 6 July 2005 00:02 (UTC)

Unused category, unlikely to attract more than five articles in any event. --Quuxplusone 07:46, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• Question I'm gonna make this my standard question for unused categories: Does anybody here know why is it empty? It hasn't been emptied recently, has it? — Sebastian (talk) 10:32, 2005 Jun 25 (UTC)
• Delete since it is redundant with :Category:Computer vision and :Category:Artificial intelligence. Also, Computer vision does not put itself in this category and does not appear to have recently been removed from the category. -Splash 14:40, Jun 25, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. James F. (talk) 23:12, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Delete as per Splash. Pavel Vozenilek 02:14, 27 Jun 2005 (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 page.

:The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category 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 page.

The result of the debate was no consensus (keep) --Kbdank71 6 July 2005 00:01 (UTC)

Unused category. --RadioActive 06:45, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• Delete, we have cats for Computer and Video games by year, so this would be redundant. Radiantmeta:mergist 10:17, Jun 25, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. James F. (talk) 23:12, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Keep, Arcade games are not Computer or video games, by Wikipedia definitions. They are a seperate topic and should be kept. — Frecklefoot | Talk June 30, 2005 17:29 (UTC)
• Keep, in agreeance with Frecklefoot's logic. Hall Monitor 30 June 2005 17:33 (UTC)
• Keep. They are currently mostly unused but is discussion about implementing them going on at Wikipedia:WikiProject Arcade games. --TheDotGamer ^Talk June 30, 2005 22:40 (UTC)
• Keep, Arcade games are not computer and video games. There is a difference. K1Bond007 July 2, 2005 06:19 (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 page.

:The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category 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 page.

The result of the debate was merge --Kbdank71 6 July 2005 00:00 (UTC)

This category was tagged on [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Category:Connecticut_natives&oldid=15793276 22:00, 10 Dec 2004] so that the contents could be moved to :Category:People from Connecticut. As that is now 6 months ago, and not much has been accomplished. The category should be merged and then deleted. <>Who?¿? 05:34, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• Merge and then delete per nomination.-Splash 14:34, Jun 25, 2005 (UTC)
• Merge. James F. (talk) 23:12, 25 Jun 2005 (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 page.

:The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category 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 page.

The result of the debate was merge --Kbdank71 5 July 2005 23:59 (UTC)

This should be merged and deleted, as the more appropriate category is :Category:People from Georgia (U.S. state), as it is more populated and differs from the country Georgia. <>Who?¿? 05:28, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• Merge into the US state since that's the clear implication of the present contents, and then delete redundant and confusingly named category. -Splash 14:32, Jun 25, 2005 (UTC)
• Rename as suggested. James F. (talk) 23:12, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. James F. (talk) 23:12, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Merge. James F. (talk) 23:12, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Rename to "Extinct dukedoms". James F. (talk) 23:12, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• You OK there, James? (merge as suggested) Grutness...wha? 00:35, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Merge/Rename as suggested and place a soft-redirect from the existing category to prevent this from reoccuring in the future. Hall Monitor 04:33, 26 Jun 2005 (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 page.

:The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category 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 page.

The result of the debate was delete --Kbdank71 5 July 2005 23:53 (UTC)

Dubiously named, NPOV, and just plain silly category. --Calton | Talk 23:45, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• Speedy delete. This should not take space and time here. Pavel Vozenilek 01:02, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. POV. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 05:05, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Delete as I wonder about the people who name categories that in real life. <>Who?¿? 05:36, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Who wonders about such people?!     Oh, and delete, OC. I'd be fine with speedy, too. — Sebastian (talk) 10:26, 2005 Jun 25 (UTC)
• Delete absurdity. -Splash 14:31, Jun 25, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, silly POV category. Speedy delete is fine by me. -- Infrogmation 15:29, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. James F. (talk) 23:12, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Rubbish ℬastique▼^talk 17:01, 26 Jun 2005 (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 page.