Category talk:Galician spellings

Category:Galician spellings
This (and a host of similarly named categories) contain only the Category:Galician alternative spellings (or its equivalent in that language). This category serves no purpose, since it contains only a single subcategory (as do its companion categories). It is also not applicable to all languages, since many languages have no alphabet.

Daniel jusitifes these nearly-empty categories by saying there is potential for including appendices, etc., but none of those appendices have been written, nor has anyone been working on such appendices. When such an appendix exists, it can be placed in the language category itself, and in the appendix category for that language. For now, the extra category level merely inconveniences users who have to click an extra time to get any information. --EncycloPetey 18:23, 24 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Abstain Other categories fit into the spellings category as well, for instance misspellings and obsolete spellings. I could find only one related appendix, for French (as seen in Category:French misspellings). I don't consider a specific umbrella category as inconvenient; yet having to find each spelling category inside relatively messy main language categories such as English language may be an inconvenience. In case this vote results in deleting Category:Galician spellings, I'd like to know if there are other suggestions of organization schemes, as I can easily handle all spelling categories using . --Daniel. 20:40, 24 December 2009 (UTC)


 * While this is true, we have only two languages using such categories that I could find (English and French). It seems silly to add an entire new level to the category hierarchy across all langauges to accomodate this. --EncycloPetey 21:50, 24 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep and move to Beer Parlour, I see no reason to talk about these individually, a vote seems like a better idea to me. Mglovesfun (talk) 13:22, 25 December 2009 (UTC)


 * The BP isn't the place to discuss deletions, but a note from there to here could be a good idea. I do intend for this one category to prompt a general discussion and solution, rather than individually nominating and discussing the many separate categories. --EncycloPetey 21:57, 25 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Well keep. Mglovesfun (talk) 14:39, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Now has two subcategories, not one. Mglovesfun (talk) 19:38, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Kept, no consensus. I'd advise against a renomination as I think there's no realistic chance of success. Mglovesfun (talk) 11:46, 15 November 2010 (UTC)