Category talk:za:Language
Add topicLatest comment: 12 years ago by Msh210 in topic RFDO discussion
RFDO discussion
[edit]
The following information passed a request for deletion.
This discussion is no longer live and is left here as an archive. Please do not modify this conversation, but feel free to discuss its conclusions.
Empty category. Hazard-SJ 01:29, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
- Keep all. Just because they're empty now doesn't mean they'll be empty forever, and there is no harm in having an empty category. It might even encourage people to add terms to it. —CodeCat 02:32, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
- Note: I've now tagged all the above. (In the future, Hazard-SJ, add
{{rfd}}to a page, then click the plus sign in the resultant notice to bring the nomination for deletion here.)—msh210℠ (talk) 07:48, 2 January 2012 (UTC) - Weak keep per Codecat.—msh210℠ (talk) 07:48, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
- Keep all unless and until it is decided in Beer parlour or in a vote that non-English topical categories with zero entries should be deleted. To see many non-English topical categories with zero entries, see e.g. the subcategories of Category:Mathematics. --Dan Polansky 13:03, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
- Hang on, I thought it was okay to delete empty categories, Special:UnusedCategories has about 2000 of these, some of which like Category:French nouns lacking gender of course should be empty as much as possible, but I'd have thought it was okay to speedy delete all of these. I seem to think there might be something on meta about it. Mglovesfun (talk) 15:33, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
- Wiktionary in particularly has a very rigid category structure, and because every language can potentially have the same categories, we can essentially 'predict' which categories might one day be used and which are genuinely unwanted for the foreseeable future. I only delete empty categories if I don't expect that there is any reason for them to ever contain any entries, not just if they don't happen to contain any right this moment. An empty category that is wanted shouldn't be deleted, it should be filled! —CodeCat 20:28, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
- My counter argument is that when a user clicks on a category, he/she is going to be disappointed to find it empty; plus deleting and restoring categories is easy, it take literally a couple of seconds. Mglovesfun (talk) 10:59, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
- Wiktionary in particularly has a very rigid category structure, and because every language can potentially have the same categories, we can essentially 'predict' which categories might one day be used and which are genuinely unwanted for the foreseeable future. I only delete empty categories if I don't expect that there is any reason for them to ever contain any entries, not just if they don't happen to contain any right this moment. An empty category that is wanted shouldn't be deleted, it should be filled! —CodeCat 20:28, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
- Hang on, I thought it was okay to delete empty categories, Special:UnusedCategories has about 2000 of these, some of which like Category:French nouns lacking gender of course should be empty as much as possible, but I'd have thought it was okay to speedy delete all of these. I seem to think there might be something on meta about it. Mglovesfun (talk) 15:33, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
Kept all due to no consensus.—msh210℠ (talk) 21:25, 22 May 2012 (UTC)