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.
Nominator's rationale: Category for music videos styled to look like film trailers. Seems overly specific and not likely to have many members. Trivialist (talk) 22:38, 8 December 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:Lists of Egyptian Premier League footballers
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 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.
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 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.
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 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.
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:Rename as proposed; revisit if necessary. There's no consensus to delete and multiple suggestions for alternate names but clear consensus to get the university name in full in there so we can sort that one out now. Timrollpickering (Talk) 14:21, 22 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: The current title misleadingly implies that this is a category for encyclopedic content, which is presumably what led to it being wrogly parented by @Rathfelder in Category:Uppsala University people. (Now fixed[1])
I have not found any similar categories for staff of a particular university, so I'm not aware of any naming convention to follow, other than that the title should include the word "Wikipedian". BrownHairedGirl(talk) • (contribs) 19:14, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I thought you were a real live person who added colour to the world ... but now you seem to be telling me that you are just a character in a Pratchett novel. How can I cope with this sad news? --BrownHairedGirl(talk) • (contribs) 19:52, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Violates WP:USERCAT as not supporting collaboration. We recently deleted a category for employees of Google, I see no reason to retain a category for employees of a particular university. VegaDark (talk) 02:51, 15 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support renaming I completely agree with Power~enwiki. I assumed UU meant Unitarian Universalist. As for deletion: looking at the members of the category, it quickly became clear that this was a consciously organized group. Here is the central page: m:Wikimedia Sverige and Higher Education/Uppsala University. It looks like the university requires its PhD students to write for Wikipedia, and a random check reveals that most of the users in this category are PhD students. As such, I'm strongly against deletion, since we do not want to alienate a group like that. In fact, it's pretty obvious to me how this category would facilitate collaboration. Their central template says that "this user is associated with Uppsala University", so maybe we can call it Category:Wikipedians associated with Uppsala University, inclusive of both students and staff (PhD students are likely both anyway), and everyone will be happy. Kevinsam2 (talk) 13:36, 17 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
These users should list themselves on a project page. Category:Wikiproject Upsala University participants would be appropriate, for instance. We already have an "Alma mater" category system and have deleted previous "Wikipedians by employer" categories. If we suddenly allowed them or started a new category system we would need to delineate the criteria so we can come up with a new naming convention and better be able to determine appropriate vs. inappropriate employer categories (What's to stop someone creating a category for employees at their local corner store without criteria for creation set?). Also a category specifically for employees or students excludes people who are not associated with the university but nonetheless wish to collaborate on that topic, bringing me back to suggesting the Wikiproject. VegaDark (talk) 19:15, 17 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Don't delete, this is clearly a collaboration category for the sake of improving Wikipedia. On top of that, rather than a very lengthy category name I would prefer a concise name (like nominator's proposal) with a further explanation of the purpose of the category on the category page. Marcocapelle (talk) 22:32, 20 December 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.
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 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.
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.
Oppose per Marcocapelle. Instead, I'd consider merging some of the sibling categories; I'm not sure we need individual and underpopulated subcategories for women, princes, monks, and people by century. ReykYO!08:58, 8 December 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.
Relisted at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2018 December 17#Category:Makossa. ℯxplicit 07:04, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
