This is a page to discuss the suggestion to delete "Category:Design".
- If you are suggesting a page for deletion, add your initial rationale to the section "Deletion rationale".
- If you want to discuss this suggestion, add comments to the section "Discussion".
- If a consensus has been reached, an administrator will explain the final decision in the section "Admin resolution".
In all cases, please make sure to read and understand the deletion policy before editing this page.
Category:Design This is apparently for, um... Trek-related designs and... stuff. Um... yeah... anyway, support or oppose its existence here. --From Andoria with Love 19:51, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
If it's going to have only 4 items... then... no. If a list of likely candidates was put onto this talk page, then maybe. -- Sulfur 22:57, 13 December 2007 (UTC) "Um" is exactly what I thought... ;) "Design" as the name of a category for "production art" (if that even is what it is supposed to be - I don't quite know) goes against every naming scheme we use. Unless we get a definition of what's actually supposed to be here, and then find a proper name for that, I wouldn't want to keep this one. -- Cid Highwind 23:46, 13 December 2007 (UTC) Like Sulfur, I would like to see a list of other potential members of this category before passing a final judgement on it, but as it stands now I oppose the category in its present form.--31dot 23:48, 13 December 2007 (UTC) I, for one, don't see a need for it, either. I sorta forgot to mention that earlier. :P So, yeah, opposed, unless it's better defined. --From Andoria with Love 07:12, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
Opposed as well. -- Renegade54 08:10, 14 December 2007 (UTC) It would seem that this would encompass production material or references, but I'm really not sure if there are that many more to contribute. --Alan del Beccio 00:28, 20 February 2008 (UTC) Retrieved from "http://memory-alpha.org/wiki/Category_talk:Design"
Deletion rationale Edit
Please reference the (above) discussion. In December 2007 it was first suggested that if this category only had 4 members, that it should be deleted. Well, it still only has four members, and (unless they've changed their minds) it had four votes of opposition.--31dot 02:17, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
- Delete - ill-defined and with few members. – Cleanse 07:46, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
Admin resolution Edit
Deleted per consensus, and little support expressed in a year.--31dot 18:55, 14 April 2009 (UTC)