Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Speedy

Categories may be listed here if they fall under the criteria specified below. Deletion and de-listing may occur after 48 hours if there are no objections. They must be tagged with {{subst:cfr-speedy|newname}} so that users of the categories are aware of the proposal. This delay is to allow for objections over correct spelling, etc. to be made and to ensure that items are not processed that do not meet the criteria.

Categories that qualify for speedy deletion (per Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion, e.g. "patent nonsense", "recreation", categories that have been empty for four days) can be tagged with the regular speedy tags, such as {{db|reason}}, and no delay is required for these. Renaming under C2E can also be processed instantly, as it is a variation on G7.

Contested requests can be removed from this list after 48 hours. If the nominator wants to continue the process they need to submit the request as a regular CfD using the instructions there.

Speedy criteria

The category-specific criteria for speedy deletion, renaming, or merging are strictly limited to:

"WP:SPEEDY" redirects here. For the guideline discussing when to end deletion debates early as "keep", see Wikipedia:Speedy keep. For the list of current candidates for speedy deletion, see Category:Candidates for speedy deletion. For the speedy renaming of categories, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Speedy. For speedy moves, see Wikipedia:Requested moves/Technical requests.

"WP:SD" redirects here. For the shortcut directory, see Wikipedia:Shortcut directory. For information on short descriptions, see Wikipedia:Short description. For WikiProject South Dakota, see Wikipedia:WikiProject South Dakota.

The criteria for speedy deletion (CSD) specify the only cases in which administrators have broad consensus to bypass deletion discussion, at their discretion, and immediately delete Wikipedia pages or media. Because deletion is reversible only by administrators, other deletions occur only after discussion, unless they are proposed deletions. Speedy deletion is intended to reduce the time spent on deletion discussions for pages or media with no practical chance of surviving discussion. Anyone can request speedy deletion by adding one of the speedy deletion templates, but only administrators may actually delete.

Before nominating a page for speedy deletion, consider whether it could be improved, reduced to a stub, merged or redirected elsewhere, reverted to a better previous revision, or handled in some other way (see Wikipedia:Deletion policy § Alternatives to deletion). A page is eligible for speedy deletion only if all of its history is also eligible. Users nominating a page for speedy deletion should specify which criterion/criteria the page meets, and should notify the page creator and any major contributors. If a page needs to be removed from Wikipedia for privacy reasons (e.g. non-public personal information, a child disclosing their age, possible libel), request oversight instead.

For most speedy deletion criteria, the creator of a page may not remove the deletion tag from it; only an editor who is not the creator of a page may do so. A creator who disagrees with the speedy deletion should instead click on the Contest this speedy deletion button that appears inside of the speedy deletion tag. This button links to the discussion page with a pre-formatted area for the creator to explain why the page should not be deleted. If an editor other than the creator removes a speedy deletion tag in good faith, it should be taken as a sign that the deletion is controversial and another deletion process should be used. The creator of a page may remove a speedy deletion tag only if the criterion in question is G6, G7, G8, G13, G14, C1, C4 or U1.

Administrators should take care not to speedily delete pages or media except in the most obvious cases. If a page has survived its most recent deletion discussion, it should not be speedily deleted except for newly discovered copyright violations and pages that meet specific uncontroversial criteria; these criteria are noted below. Contributors sometimes create pages over several edits, so administrators should avoid deleting a page that appears incomplete too soon after its creation.

Besides speedy deletion, there are the following methods of deletion:

• Wikipedia:Deletion discussions (AfD, CfD, FfD, MfD, RfD, TfD), the normal method of carrying out deletion.
• Wikipedia:Proposed deletions, for nominating articles and files for uncontroversial deletion.
• Wikipedia:Proposed deletion of biographies of living people, for articles on living persons without sources.

Nomenclature

Letter-number abbreviations (G12, A3...) are often used to refer to these criteria, and are given in each section. For example, "CSD G12" refers to criterion 12 under general (copyright infringement) and "CSD U1" refers to criterion 1 under user (user request). Some in-between numbers are skipped, as abbreviations denoting obsolete criteria remain unused. These abbreviations can be confusing to new editors or anyone else unfamiliar with this page; in many situations a plain-English explanation of why a specific page was or should be deleted is preferable.

Requesting speedy deletion

Immediately following each criterion below is a list of templates used to mark pages or media files for speedy deletion under the criterion being used. To alert administrators to the nomination, place the relevant speedy deletion template at the top of the page or media file you are nominating (but see § Pages that need to be tagged in a special manner below). Please be sure to supply an edit summary that mentions that the page is being nominated for speedy deletion. All of the speedy deletion templates are named as Db-X with Db standing for 'delete because'. A list of the Db-X templates can be found at Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion/Deletion templates.

If a page falls under more than one of the criteria, instead of adding multiple tags it is possible to add a single {{Db-multiple}} tag to cover them all. For example, if an article seems both to be blatantly promotional (G11) and also to fail to indicate the significance of its subject (A7) then the tag {{Db-multiple|G11|A7}} can be used to indicate both of these concerns. The article can then be speedily deleted if an administrator assesses it and decides that either or both of the criteria apply.

There is a strong consensus that the creators and major contributors of pages and media files should be warned of a speedy deletion nomination (or of the deletion if not informed before). All speedy deletion templates (using criteria other than U1, G5, G6, G7, and G8) thus contain in their body a pre-formatted, suggested warning template to notify the relevant party or parties of the nomination for speedy deletion under the criterion used. You can copy and paste such warnings to the talk pages of the creators and major contributors, choose from others listed at Category:CSD warning templates, or place the unified warning template, {{subst:CSD-warn|csd|Page name}}, which allows you to tailor your warning under any particular criterion by replacing csd with the associated criterion abbreviation (e.g. g4, a7).

Use common sense when applying a speedy deletion request to a page: review the page history to make sure that all earlier revisions of the page meet the speedy deletion criterion, because a single editor can replace an article with material that appears to cause the page to meet one or more of the criteria.

Pages that need to be tagged in a special manner

Some pages either cannot or should not be tagged for speedy deletion in the normal manner:

• Pages that you cannot edit (e.g., due to protection), or JSON pages: place the template on the corresponding Talk page instead, along with an explanation of which page to delete.
• Template: pages: place the template within a noinclude tag, like this: <noinclude>{{Db-x}}</noinclude>
• Module: pages (except for /doc pages): place the template with Module:Module wikitext, like this: require('Module:Module wikitext')._addText('{{Db-x}}')
• CSS (including sanitized CSS) or JavaScript pages: place the template in a comment, like this: /* {{Db-x}} */

Pages that have survived deletion discussions

For general principles of how deletion processes interact, see Wikipedia:Deletion policy § Process interaction.

As an exception to the norm that a page surviving its most recent deletion discussion means that it should not be speedily deleted, the following criteria apply also to those pages, with or without any specified limitations:

• § G5. Creations by banned or blocked users, or in violation of general sanctions – subject to the strict condition that the XfD participants were unaware that the page would have met this criterion
• § G6. Technical deletions – only if the deletion is temporary, or if no actual content will be removed
• § G8. Pages dependent on a non-existent or deleted page
• § G9. Office actions
• § G12. Unambiguous copyright infringement
• § G13. Abandoned drafts and Articles for creation submissions – if 6 months have passed since the deletion discussion and any subsequent human edits
• § F8. Files available as identical copies on Wikimedia Commons – if the image did not exist on Commons at the time of the FfD
• § F9. Unambiguous copyright infringement
• § U1. User request

These criteria may only be used in such cases when no controversy exists; in the event of a dispute, start a new deletion discussion. However, newly discovered copyright violations should be tagged for G12 if the violation existed in all previous revisions of the article. G5 may be also used at discretion, subject to meeting the criterion outlined above.

General

These apply to every type of page with exclusions listed for specific criteria, and so apply to articles, drafts, redirects, user pages, talk pages, files, etc. Read the specifics for each criterion to see where and how they apply.

G1. Patent nonsense

Further information: Wikipedia:Patent nonsense

This applies to pages consisting entirely of incoherent text or gibberish with no meaningful content or history. It does not cover poor writing, partisan screeds, obscene remarks, implausible theories, vandalism, hoaxes, fictional material, coherent non-English material, or poorly translated material. In short, if it is understandable, G1 does not apply. It also does not apply to pages in the user namespace.

• {{Db-g1}}, {{Db-nonsense}}
• Category:Candidates for speedy deletion as nonsense pages (0)

G2. Test pages

This applies to pages created to test editing or other Wikipedia functions. It applies to subpages of the Wikipedia Sandbox created as tests, but does not apply to the Sandbox itself, pages in the user namespace, or valid but unused or duplicate templates.

• {{Db-g2}}, {{Db-test}}
• Category:Candidates for speedy deletion as test pages (0)

G3. Pure vandalism and blatant hoaxes

Further information: Wikipedia:Vandalism and Wikipedia:Do not create hoaxes

This applies to pages that are blatant and obvious misinformation, blatant hoaxes (including files intended to misinform), and redirects created by cleanup from page-move vandalism. Articles about notable hoaxes are acceptable if it is clear that they are describing a hoax.

• {{Db-g3}}, {{Db-vandalism}} – for vandalism
• {{Db-hoax}} – for hoaxes
• Category:Candidates for speedy deletion as vandalism (0), Category:Candidates for speedy deletion as hoaxes (0)

G4. Recreation of a page that was deleted per a deletion discussion

This applies to sufficiently identical copies, having any title, of a page deleted via its most recent deletion discussion. It excludes pages that are not substantially identical to the deleted version, and pages to which the reason for the deletion no longer applies. It excludes pages in userspace and draftspace where the content was converted to a draft for explicit improvement (but not simply to circumvent Wikipedia's deletion policy). This criterion also does not cover content undeleted via a deletion review, or that was only deleted via proposed deletion (including deletion discussions closed as "soft delete") or speedy deletion.

• {{Db-g4}}, {{Db-repost}}
• Category:Candidates for speedy deletion as pages previously deleted via deletion discussion (0)

G5. Creations by banned or blocked users, or in violation of general sanctions

Further information: WP:BANREVERT

This applies to pages created by banned or blocked users in violation of their ban or block, as well as pages created in violation of general sanctions, and that have no substantial edits by others not subject to the ban or sanctions.

• To qualify for a ban- or block-based speedy deletion, the edit or page must have been made while the user was actually banned or blocked. A page created before the ban or block was imposed or after it was lifted will not qualify under this criterion.
• For topic-banned editors, the page must be a violation of the user's specific ban, and must not include contributions legitimately about some other topic.
• For general sanctions, the page must have been created in violation of creation restrictions, such as the extended confirmed restriction, and the remedies must specifically permit deletion as an enforcement measure.
• When a blocked or banned person uses an alternate account (sockpuppet) to avoid a restriction, any pages created via the sock account after the earliest block or ban of any of that person's accounts qualify for G5 (if not substantially edited by others); this is the most common case for applying G5.
• G5 should not be applied to transcluded templates or populated categories unless they have been transcluded or populated entirely by the banned or blocked user; these edits need to be reverted before deletion.
• {{Db-g5|name of banned user}}, {{Db-banned|name of banned user}}, {{Db-gs|contentious topic code}}
• Category:Candidates for speedy deletion as having been created by blocked or banned users (0), Category:Candidates for speedy deletion as having been created in violation of general sanctions (0)

G6. Technical deletions

See also: Wikipedia:What G6 is not

This is for uncontroversial maintenance, including:

• Deleting redirects or other pages which prevent page moves. Administrators should be aware of the proper procedures where a redirect or page holding up a page move has a non-trivial page history. An administrator who deletes a page that is blocking a move should ensure that the move is completed after deleting it.
• Deleting pages unambiguously created in error or in the incorrect namespace, or redirects created by moving away from a title that was obviously unintended.
• Deleting templates orphaned as the result of a consensus at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion.

• {{Db-g6|rationale=reason}} – If none of the special tags below applies, this tag should be used with a reason specified in the |rationale= parameter.
• {{Db-copypaste|page to be moved}} – for cut-and-paste page moves that need to be temporarily deleted to make room for a clean page move.
• {{Db-move|page to be moved|reason}} – for pages that are currently holding up a non-controversial or consensual page move.
• {{Db-moved}} – for pages that were holding up a page move, until they were moved out of the way by a page mover.
• {{Db-afc-move|Draft:page to be moved}} – for pages that are currently holding up a non-controversial or consensual page move as a result of an Articles for creation (AFC) review, typically for articles in draft space.
• {{Db-xfd|fullvotepage=link to closed deletion discussion}} – for pages where a consensus to delete has been previously reached via deletion discussion, but which were not deleted.
• {{Db-error}} – for pages obviously created in error.
• Category:Candidates for technical speedy deletion (0)

G7. Author requests deletion

If requested in good faith and provided that the only substantial content of the page was added by its author. For redirects created as a result of a page move, the mover must also have been the only substantive contributor to the pages before the move. If the sole author blanks a page other than a userspace page, a category page, or any type of talk page, this can be taken as a deletion request. If an author requests deletion of a page currently undergoing a deletion discussion, the closing admin may interpret that request as agreement with the deletion rationale.

• {{Db-g7}}, {{Db-author}}, {{Db-blanked}}, {{Db-self}}
• Category:Candidates for speedy deletion by user (0) (same category as U1)

G8. Pages dependent on a non-existent or deleted page

Examples include, but are not limited to:

• Talk pages with no corresponding subject page
• Subpages with no parent page
• TimedText pages without a corresponding file (or when the file has been moved to Commons)
• Redirects to target pages that never existed or were deleted
• Editnotices of non-existent or unsalted deleted pages

This criterion excludes any page that is useful to Wikipedia, and in particular:

• Deletion discussions that are not logged elsewhere
• User talk pages
• Talk page archives (except article talk page archives where the corresponding article and main talk page have been deleted and the page is not otherwise useful to Wikipedia – check for page-moves and merges before using G8 on article-talk-page-archives; the parent article might still exist under a different name)
• Redirects that were broken as a result of a page move or retargeting (these should instead be retargeted to their target's new name), except where R2 speedy deletion would then immediately apply if they were fixed (e.g., redirects to articles that have been draftified)
• Plausible redirects that can be changed to valid targets
• User subpages
• Talk pages for files that exist on Wikimedia Commons
• Pages that should be moved to a different location

Exceptions may be sign-posted with the template {{G8-exempt}}.

• {{Db-g8}} – for cases not covered by any of the special tags below
• {{Db-redirnone}} – for pages that redirect to nonexistent/deleted pages, or pages currently flagged for speedy deletion
• {{Db-subpage}} – for subpages of nonexistent/deleted pages, or pages currently flagged for speedy deletion
• {{Db-talk}} – for talk pages of nonexistent/deleted pages, or pages currently flagged for speedy deletion
• Category:Candidates for speedy deletion as dependent on a non-existent page (0), Category:Candidates for speedy deletion as broken redirects (0)

G9. Office actions

Main page: Wikipedia:Office actions

In exceptional circumstances, the Wikimedia Foundation office reserves the right to speedy-delete a page. Deletions of this type must not be reversed without permission from the Foundation.

G10. Pages that disparage, threaten, intimidate, or harass their subject or some other entity, and serve no other purpose

Main page: Wikipedia:Attack page

Examples of "attack pages" may include: libel, legal threats, material intended purely to harass or intimidate a person, or biographical material about a living person that is entirely negative in tone and unsourced. These pages should be speedily deleted when there is no neutral version in the page history to revert to. Both the page title and page content may be taken into account in assessing an attack. Articles about living people deleted under this criterion should not be restored or recreated by any editor until the biographical article standards are met. Other pages violating the Biographies of living persons policy might be eligible for deletion under the conditions stipulated at Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons § Summary deletion, creation prevention, and courtesy blanking, although in most cases a deletion discussion should be initiated instead.

Redirects from plausible search terms are not eligible under this criterion. For example, a term used on the target page to refer to its subject is often a plausible redirect – see Wikipedia:RNEUTRAL.

• {{Db-g10}}, {{Db-attack}}, {{Db-attackorg}}, {{Db-personal attack}}
• {{Db-negublp}} – for articles about living persons that are unsourced, entirely negative in tone, and have no neutral version to revert to
• Category:Candidates for speedy deletion as attack pages (0)

G11. Unambiguous advertising or promotion

Main page: Wikipedia:Spam

This applies to pages that are exclusively promotional and would need to be fundamentally rewritten to serve as encyclopedia articles, rather than advertisements. If a subject is notable and the content could plausibly be replaced with text written from a neutral point of view, this is preferable to deletion. Note: Any article that describes its subject from a neutral point of view does not qualify for this criterion. However, "promotion" does not necessarily mean commercial promotion: anything can be promoted, including a person, a non-commercial organization, a point of view, etc.

• {{Db-g11}}, {{Db-promo}}, {{Db-spam}}
• {{Db-spamuser}} – for userpages used only for publicity and promotion, with a username that promotes or implies affiliation with the entity being promoted
• Category:Candidates for speedy deletion as spam (1)

G12. Unambiguous copyright infringement

Main page: Wikipedia:Copyright violations

This applies to text pages that contain copyrighted material with no credible assertion of public domain, fair use, or a compatible free license, where there is no non-infringing content on the page worth saving. Only if the history is unsalvageably corrupted should it be deleted in its entirety; earlier versions without infringement should be retained. For equivocal cases that do not meet speedy deletion criteria (such as where there is a dubious assertion of permission, where free-content edits overlie the infringement, or where there is only partial infringement or close paraphrasing), the article or the appropriate section should be blanked with {{subst:Copyvio|url=insert URL here}}, and the page should be listed at Wikipedia:Copyright problems. Please consult Wikipedia:Copyright violations for other instructions. Public-domain and other free content, such as a Wikipedia mirror, do not fall under this criterion, nor is mere lack of attribution of such works a reason for speedy deletion. For images and media, see the equivalent criterion in the "Files" section here, which has more specific instructions.

• {{Db-g12|url=source URL}}, {{Db-copyvio|url=source URL}}

Note: If other criteria apply in addition to G12, the template {{Db-multiple}} should be used instead, so we do not waste time seeking copyright permission after deleting the page.

• {{Db-multiple|g12|url=source URL|other criteria}}
• Category:Candidates for speedy deletion as copyright violations (0) (same category as F9)

G13. Abandoned drafts and Articles for creation submissions

Further information: Wikipedia:Articles for creation

This applies to any pages that have not been edited by a human in six months found in:

1. Draft namespace,
2. Userspace with an {{AFC submission}} template
3. Userspace with no content except the article wizard placeholder text.

Redirects are exempt from G13 deletion. Adding a CSD template to a page does not reset the six-month clock, but removing a CSD template does. Pages deleted under G13 may be restored upon request by following the procedure at Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion/G13.

• {{Db-g13}}, {{Db-afc}}, {{db-blankdraft}}
• Category:Candidates for speedy deletion as abandoned drafts or AfC submissions (0)

G14. Unnecessary disambiguation pages

This applies to the following disambiguation pages and redirects:

• Disambiguation pages that have titles ending in "(disambiguation)" but disambiguate only one extant Wikipedia page.
• Regardless of title, disambiguation pages that disambiguate zero extant Wikipedia pages.
• A redirect that ends in "(disambiguation)" but does not redirect to a disambiguation page or a page that performs a disambiguation-like function (such as set index articles or lists).

If a disambiguation page links to only one article and does not end in (disambiguation), it should be changed to a redirect, unless it is more appropriate to move the linked page to the title currently used for the disambiguation page.

• {{Db-g14}}, {{Db-disambig}}
• Category:Candidates for speedy deletion as unnecessary disambiguation pages (0)

Articles

These criteria apply only to pages in the article (main) namespace. They do not apply to redirects. For any articles that are not speedy deletion candidates, use Wikipedia:Articles for deletion or Wikipedia:Proposed deletion.

A1. No context

This applies to articles lacking sufficient context to identify the subject of the article. Example: "He is a funny man with a red car. He makes people laugh." It applies only to very short articles. Note that context is different from content, treated in A3. This excludes coherent non-English material, and poorly translated material. If any information in the title or on the page, including links, allows an editor, possibly with the aid of a web search, to find further information on the subject in an attempt to expand or edit it, A1 is not appropriate. Do not tag under this criterion in the first few minutes after a new article is created.

• {{Db-a1}}, {{Db-nocontext}}
• Category:Candidates for speedy deletion as lacking context (0)

A2. Foreign-language articles that exist on another Wikimedia project

This applies to articles not written in English that have essentially the same content as an article on another Wikimedia project. If the article is not the same as an article on another project, use the template {{Not English}} instead, and list the page at Wikipedia:Pages needing translation into English for review and possible translation.

• {{Db-a2}}, {{Db-foreign}}
• Category:Candidates for speedy deletion as existing on foreign Wikimedia projects (0)

A3. No content

This applies to articles consisting only of external links, category tags or "See also" sections, a rephrasing of the title, attempts to correspond with the person or group named by its title, questions that should have been asked at a noticeboard, chat-like comments, template tags, or images. This may also apply to articles consisting entirely of the framework of the Article wizard with no additional content, or no content at all. However, a very short article may be a valid stub if it has context, in which case it is not eligible for deletion under this criterion. Similarly, this criterion does not cover a page having only an infobox, unless its contents also meet another speedy deletion criterion. This criterion excludes poor writing, coherent non-English material, and poorly translated material. Do not tag under this criterion in the first few minutes after a new article is created.

• {{Db-a3}}, {{Db-nocontent}}, {{Db-contact}}
• {{Db-empty}} – context-specific version: calls {{Db-c1}} for categories, and {{Db-a3}} everywhere else.
• Category:Candidates for speedy deletion as empty articles (0)

A7. No indication of importance (people, animals, organizations, web content, events)

Further information: Wikipedia:Credible claim of significance

This applies to any article about a real person, individual animal, commercial or non-commercial organization, web content, or organized event that does not indicate why its subject is important or significant, with the exception of educational institutions. This is distinct from verifiability and reliability of sources, and is a lower standard than notability. This criterion applies only to articles about the listed subjects; in particular, it does not apply to articles about albums (these may be covered by CSD A9), products, books, films, TV programs, software, or other creative works, nor to entire species of animals. The criterion does apply if the claim of significance or importance given is not credible, and any article with a blatantly false claim may be submitted for speedy deletion as a hoax instead. If the claim's credibility is unclear, you can improve the article yourself, propose deletion, or list the article at articles for deletion.

The criterion does not apply to any article that makes any credible claim of significance or importance even if the claim is not supported by a reliable source or does not qualify on Wikipedia's notability guidelines.

• {{Db-a7}}
• {{Db-person}} – for people
• {{Db-band}} – for bands
• {{Db-club}} – for clubs, societies and groups
• {{Db-inc}} – for commercial and non-commercial organizations
• {{Db-web}} – for web content
• {{Db-animal}} – for individual animals
• {{Db-event}} – for events
• Category:Candidates for speedy deletion as importance or significance not asserted (0) (same as A9)

A9. No indication of importance (musical recordings)

Further information: Wikipedia:Credible claim of significance

This applies to any article about a musical recording or list of musical recordings where none of the contributing recording artists has an article and that does not indicate why its subject is important or significant (both conditions must be met). This is distinct from questions of verifiability and reliability of sources, and is a lower standard than notability. This criterion does not apply to other forms of creative media, products, or any other types of articles.

The criterion does not apply to any article that makes any credible claim of significance or importance even if the claim is not supported by a reliable source or does not qualify on Wikipedia's notability guidelines.

• {{Db-a9}}, {{Db-album}}, {{Db-song}}, {{Db-discog}}
• Category:Candidates for speedy deletion as importance or significance not asserted (0) (same as A7)

A10. Recently created article that duplicates an existing topic

This applies to any recently created article with no relevant page history that duplicates an existing English Wikipedia article, and that does not expand upon, detail or improve information within any existing article(s) on the subject, and where the title is not a plausible redirect. This does not include split pages or any article that expands or reorganizes an existing one or that contains referenced, mergeable material. It also does not include disambiguation pages.

• {{Db-a10|article=Existing article title}}, {{Db-same|article=Existing article title}}

The title chosen for the vast majority of duplicate articles will be a plausible misspelling of, or alternative name for, the existing article, and a redirect should be created instead of deletion. This criterion should, accordingly, only be used rarely, and only for pages whose titles are not plausible redirects.

• Category:Candidates for speedy deletion as duplicate articles (2)

A11. Obviously invented

Main page: Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not for things made up one day

Further information: Wikipedia:Credible claim of significance

This applies to any article that plainly indicates that the subject was invented/coined/discovered by the article's creator or someone the creator personally knows, and does not credibly indicate why its subject is important or significant. The criterion does not apply to any article that makes any credible claim of significance or importance even if the claim is not supported by a reliable source or does not qualify under Wikipedia's notability guidelines. Note: This is not intended for hoaxes (see CSD G3).

• {{Db-a11}}, {{Db-invented}}, {{Db-madeup}}
• Category:Candidates for speedy deletion as obviously invented (0)

Redirects

These criteria apply to redirects, including soft redirects, in any namespace, with exclusions listed for specific criteria. For any redirects that are not speedy deletion candidates, use Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion.

R2. Cross-namespace redirects

This applies to redirects (apart from shortcuts) from the main namespace to any other namespace except the Category:, Template:, Wikipedia:, Help: and Portal: namespaces.

See also Wikipedia:Cross-namespace redirects, Category:Cross-namespace redirects, and MOS:LINKSTYLE.

• {{Db-r2}}, {{Db-rediruser}}
• Category:Candidates for speedy deletion as inappropriate cross-namespace redirects (0)

R3. Recently created, implausible typos

This applies to recently created redirects from implausible typos or misnomers. However, redirects from common misspellings or misnomers are generally useful, as are some redirects in other languages. This criterion does not apply to redirects created as a result of a page move, unless nothing was at the title until recently. It also does not apply to articles and stubs that have been converted into redirects, including redirects created by merges, or to redirects ending with "(disambiguation)" that point to a disambiguation page.

• {{Db-r3}}, {{Db-redirtypo}}
• Category:Candidates for speedy deletion as implausible redirects (0)

R4. File namespace redirects with names that match Wikimedia Commons pages

This applies to redirects in the "File:" namespace with the same name as a file or redirect at Wikimedia Commons, provided the redirect on Wikipedia has no file links (unless the links are obviously intended for the file or redirect at Wikimedia Commons).

• {{Db-r4}}, {{Db-redircom}}
• Category:Candidates for speedy deletion as file redirects shadowing Wikimedia Commons files (0)

Other issues with redirects

• For redirects to deleted or non-existent pages, see G8.
• For redirects that end in "(disambiguation)", see G14.
• For redirects without a space before a parenthetical disambiguation, see X3.
• For redirects that are not speedy deletion candidates, use Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion.

Redirect pages that have useful page history should never be speedily deleted. In some cases it may be possible to make a useful redirect by changing the target instead of deleting it. Redirects that do not work because of software limitations, such as redirects to special pages or to pages on other wikis, may be converted to soft redirects if they have a non-trivial history or other valid uses.

For reversal of redirects, use {{Db-move}}, a special case of {{Db-g6}}.

Files

These apply to files, images, and other media.

Note: These criteria formerly began with I (e.g. I1, I6, I9) but have since been replaced with F, without the actual criteria being changed. This was because the file namespace was formerly known as the image namespace.

For any images and other media that are not speedy deletion candidates, use Wikipedia:Proposed deletion or Wikipedia:Files for discussion.

F1. Redundant

This applies to unused duplicates or lower-quality/resolution copies of another Wikipedia file having the same file format. This excludes images in the Wikimedia Commons; for these, see criterion F8.

• {{Db-f1|replacement file name.ext}}, {{Db-redundantfile|replacement file name.ext}}, {{Isd|replacement file name.ext}}
• Category:Candidates for speedy deletion as redundant files (0)

F2. Corrupt, missing, or empty file

This applies to files that are corrupt, missing, empty, or that contain superfluous and blatant non-metadata information. This also applies to file description pages that lack a corresponding file or correspond to Commons files and do not include information that is specific to English Wikipedia (like {{FeaturedPicture}}).

• {{Db-f2}}, {{Db-nofile}}, {{Db-fpcfail}}
• {{Db-imagepage}} – for file description pages with no corresponding file
• Category:Candidates for speedy deletion as missing files (0)

F3. Improper license

This criterion is used to flag media licensed as "for non-commercial use only" (including non-commercial Creative Commons licenses), "no derivative use", "for Wikipedia use only" or "used with permission". These may be deleted, unless they comply with the limited standards for the use of non-free content. Files uploaded after 1 August 2021 licensed under versions of the GFDL earlier than 1.3, without allowing for later versions or other licenses, may be deleted.

• {{Db-f3}}, {{Db-noncom}}
• Category:Candidates for speedy deletion as files with unacceptable licenses (0)

F4. Lack of licensing information

This applies to media files lacking the necessary licensing information to verify copyright status after being identified as such for seven days. Administrators should check the upload summary, file information page, and the image itself for a source before deleting under this criterion.

• {{subst:Di-no source}}, {{subst:Nsd}} – no source
• {{subst:Di-no license}}, {{subst:Nld}} – no license
• {{subst:Di-no source no license}}, {{subst:Nsdnld}} – neither source nor license
• {{subst:Di-dw no source}}, {{subst:Dw-nsd}} – derivative work with no source for the incorporated work
• {{subst:Di-dw no license}}, {{subst:Dw-nld}} – derivative work with no license for the incorporated work
• {{subst:Di-dw no source no license}}, {{subst:Dw-nsdnld}} – derivative work with neither source nor license for the incorporated work
• Category:Wikipedia files with unknown source, Category:Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status

F5. Orphaned non-free use files

This applies to images and other media that are not under a free license or in the public domain and that are not used in any article. These may be deleted after being identified as such for more than seven days or immediately if the image's only use was on a deleted article and it is very unlikely to have any use on any other valid article. This includes previous revisions of the image or files overwritten by copyright violations. Reasonable exceptions may be made for images uploaded for an upcoming article.

• {{Db-f5}} – for immediate F5 deletions
• {{subst:Di-orphaned non-free use}}, {{subst:Orfud}} – for files
• {{subst:Orphaned non-free revisions}}, {{subst:Orfurrev}} – for revisions only
• Category:Candidates for speedy deletion as orphaned non-free use files (0)

F6. Missing non-free use rationale

This applies to non-free files claiming fair use but without a use rationale. These may be deleted after being identified as such for seven days. The boilerplate copyright tags setting out fair use criteria does not constitute a rationale. This criterion does not apply to situations where a use rationale is provided but is disputed.

• {{Di-no non-free use rationale}}, {{subst:Nrd}} – no non-free use rationale
• {{Di-missing article links}} – missing non-free use rationale for one or more articles
• Category:All Wikipedia files with no non-free use rationale (5)

F7. Invalid fair-use claim

2. Non-free images or media from a press agency or photo agency (e.g. Associated Press, Getty Images), where the file itself is not the subject of sourced commentary, are considered an invalid claim of fair use and fail the strict requirements of Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria, and may be deleted immediately.
3. Non-free images or media that have been identified as being replaceable by a free image and tagged with {{Rnfu}} may be deleted after Two days, if no justification is given for the claim of irreplaceability. If the replaceability is disputed, the nominator should not be the one deleting the image.
4. Invalid fair-use claims tagged with {{Dnfu}} may be deleted seven days after they are tagged, if a full and valid fair-use use rationale is not added.

• {{Db-f7}}, {{Db-badfairuse}} – for immediate F7 deletions
• {{subst:Di-replaceable non-free use}}, {{subst:Rnfu}} – replaceable with free images
• {{subst:Di-disputed non-free use rationale}}, {{subst:Dnfu}} – disputed non-free use rationales
• Category:Candidates for speedy deletion as files with clearly invalid fair-use claims (0)

F8. Files available as identical copies on Wikimedia Commons

Provided the following conditions are met:

• The Commons version is in the same file format and is of the same or higher quality/resolution.
• The file's license and source status is beyond reasonable doubt, and the license is undoubtedly accepted at Commons. To avoid deletion at Commons, please ensure the Commons page description has all of the following:
  • Name and date of death of the creator of the artistic work represented by the file, or else clear evidence that a free license was given. If anonymous, ensure the page description provides evidence that establishes the anonymous status.
  • Country where the artistic work represented by the file was situated, or where it was first published.
  • Date when the artistic work represented by the file was created or first published, depending on the copyright law of the origin country.
  • All file revisions that meet the first condition have been transferred to Commons as revisions of the Commons copy and properly marked as such.
• The file is not marked as {{Do not move to Commons}} or as {{Keep local}}.
• All information on the image description page is present on the Commons image description page, including the complete upload history with links to the uploader's local user pages (the upload history is not necessary if the file's license does not require it, although it is still recommended).
  • If there is any information not relevant to any other project on the file description page (like {{FeaturedPicture}}), the image description page must be undeleted after the file deletion.
• If the file is available on Commons under a different name than locally, all local references to the image must be updated to point to the title used at Commons.
• The file is not protected. Do not delete protected images, even if there is an identical copy on Commons, unless the image is no longer in use (check what links here). They are usually locally uploaded and protected here since they are used in the interface or in some widely used high-risk templates. Deleting the local copy of an image used in the interface does break things. More about high-risk images.
• {{C-uploaded}} images and other files may be speedily deleted as soon as they are off the Main Page.
• {{Db-f8}}, {{Now Commons}}, {{Now Commons|File:name of file on Commons.ext}}
• Category:Wikipedia files with the same name on Wikimedia Commons, Category:Wikipedia files with a different name on Wikimedia Commons

F9. Unambiguous copyright infringement

This applies to obviously non-free images (or other media files) that are not claimed by the uploader to be fair use. A URL or other indication of where the image originated should be mentioned. This does not include images with a credible claim that the owner has released them under a Wikipedia-compatible free license. Most images from stock photo libraries such as Getty Images will not be released under such a license. Blatant infringements should be tagged with the {{Db-filecopyvio}} template. Non-blatant copyright infringements should be discussed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion.

• {{Db-f9|url=URL of source}}, {{Db-filecopyvio|url=URL of source}}
• Category:Candidates for speedy deletion as copyright violations (0)

F11. No evidence of permission

If an uploader has specified a license and has named a third party as the source/copyright holder without providing evidence that this third party has in fact agreed, the item may be deleted seven days after notification of the uploader. Acceptable evidence of licensing normally consists of either a link to the source website where the license is stated, or a statement by the copyright holder e-mailed or forwarded to permissions-en@wikimedia.org. Such a confirmation is also required if the source is an organization that the uploader claims to represent, or a web publication that the uploader claims to be their own. Instances of obvious copyright violations where the uploader would have no reasonable expectation of obtaining permission (e.g. major studio movie posters, television images, album covers, logos that are not simple enough to be public domain, etc.) should be speedily deleted per reason F9 (unambiguous copyright infringement), unless fair-use can be claimed. Files tagged with {{Permission pending}} for more than 30 days may also be speedily deleted under this criterion. (Please note that the backlog for messages sent to the permissions-en queue is currently 0 days. You may wish to wait at least this amount of time before tagging VRT pending images for deletion.) Files tagged {{Permission received}} whose permissions have not been confirmed after 30 days may be deleted immediately under this criterion, without waiting an additional seven days, provided a check of the ticket is performed by a VRT agent to confirm that no further interaction is ongoing.

• {{subst:Di-no permission}}, {{subst:Npd}}
• {{subst:Db-no permission-VRT}}
• Category:Wikipedia files missing permission

Categories

For any category pages that are not speedy deletion candidates, use Wikipedia:Categories for discussion.

C1. Unpopulated categories

This criterion applies to categories that have been unpopulated for at least seven days. This does not apply to disambiguation categories, category redirects, categories under discussion at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion (or other such discussions), or project categories that by their nature may become empty on occasion (e.g. cleanup categories, or Category:Wikipedians looking for help). Place {{Possibly empty category}} (or, for administrative categories, {{Wikipedia category}}) at the top of the page to prevent such categories from being deleted.

• {{Db-c1}}, {{db-catempty}}.
• {{Db-empty}} – context-specific version: calls {{Db-c1}} for categories, and {{Db-a3}} everywhere else.
• Category:Empty categories awaiting deletion (143), and after seven days Category:Candidates for speedy deletion as empty categories (0)

C2. Speedy renaming and merging

Assorted sub-criteria that are used only at WP:CFDS; please see that page for details and instructions.

C4. Unused maintenance categories

This criterion applies to unused maintenance categories, such as empty dated maintenance categories for dates in the past (e.g. Category:Articles lacking sources from July 2004), tracking categories no longer used by a template after a rewrite, or empty subcategories of Category:Wikipedia sockpuppets or Category:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets. Note that empty maintenance categories are not necessarily unused—this criterion is for categories that will always be empty, not just currently empty. If you are unsure whether a category is still being used by a template, consider asking the creator of the category or at the template's talk page before tagging.

• {{db-c4}}, {{db-templatecat}}
• Category:Candidates for speedy deletion as unused maintenance categories (0)

User pages

Further information: Wikipedia:User pages

These criteria apply only to pages in the User: and User talk: namespaces. For any user pages that are not speedy deletion candidates, use Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion.

U1. User request

Personal user pages and subpages (but not user talk pages) upon request by their user. This also includes editnotices for user pages. In some rare cases, there may be administrative need to retain the page. User talk pages are not eligible for speedy deletion under this criterion. Pages that have previously been moved are only eligible if all previous titles were in the user's userspace. Note: The template does not display on certain pages (such as .css and .js pages), but its categorization will work.

• {{Db-u1}}, {{Db-userreq}}
• Category:Candidates for speedy deletion by user (0)

U2. Nonexistent user

"WP:U2" redirects here. For the WikiProject for the band, see Wikipedia:WikiProject U2.

This applies to user pages, user subpages, and user talk pages of users that do not exist on the English Wikipedia (check Special:ListUsers), except user pages for IP users who have edited, redirects from misspellings of an established user's user page, and redirects created due to a user being renamed. Pages of users who exist on other WMF wikis but do not have local accounts are eligible for deletion.

Before placing one of the following templates or deleting a page under this criterion, consider whether moving the page to another location, such as a sub-page of the user page of the primary contributor, is preferable to deletion.

• {{Db-u2}}, {{Db-nouser}}
• Category:Candidates for speedy deletion as userpage or subpage of a nonexistent user (0)

U5. A non-contributor's misuse of Wikipedia as a web host

Pages in userspace consisting of writings, information, discussions, or activities not closely related to Wikipedia's goals, where the owner has made few or no edits outside of user pages, except for plausible drafts and pages adhering to Wikipedia:User pages § What may I have in my user pages? It applies regardless of the age of the page in question.

Before placing this template or deleting a page under this criterion:

• Read Wikipedia:User pages § Handling inappropriate content and Wikipedia:User pages § Deletion of user pages.
• Consider blanking pages with a significant history unrelated to the content that is being deleted.
• For draft articles that are on a user's main page and which do not otherwise qualify for speedy deletion, consider moving it to a sub-page.
• {{Db-u5}}, {{Db-notwebhost}}
• Category:Candidates for speedy deletion as blatant NOTWEBHOST violations (0)

Exceptional circumstances

These temporary criteria apply to large-scale cleanups of problematic pages that would overwhelm the normal deletion processes. Criteria should be deprecated when no longer needed.

X3. Redirects with no space before a parenthetical disambiguation

Examples: "Foo(bar)", "Joe Smith(disambiguation)". This does not apply to terms that will correctly or plausibly be searched for without spaces, nor does it apply if the redirect contains substantive page history (e.g. from a merge). Before nominating a redirect under this criterion:

• Create the correctly spaced version as a redirect to the same target if it would make a good redirect but does not exist
• Adjust any incoming internal links to point to the correctly spaced version
• {{db-x3}}
• Category:Candidates for speedy deletion as redirects with no space before a parenthetical disambiguation (0)

Non-criteria

Commonly denied CSD reasons

The following proposals for new speedy deletion criteria are frequently raised, but have repeatedly failed to gain consensus:

• How-to articles
• Essay articles
• Expansion of A7, A9 and A11 to include books, software, schools and/or other subjects
• Neologisms
• Unsourced articles

A7, A9 and A11 scope

A7, A9 and A11 do not apply to any other subject that does not indicate importance. Expanding the scope of A7, A9 and A11 to different subjects (such as products, software, books, schools, etc.) have been proposed several times in the past and failed to gain consensus. Amongst the reasons for those rejections were that such subjects are not created often enough to require speedy deletion (such articles can be handled by proposed deletion or by listing the article at articles for deletion), that such subjects cannot be objectively covered in A7, A9 and A11's wording and that admins are not able to assess claims of importance for certain subjects. Before proposing a change to A7, A9 and A11 to expand their scope, please check whether your proposal has not already been discussed on the talk page (archives).

The following are not by themselves sufficient to justify speedy deletion:

1. Reasons based on Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not or essays. Wikipedia is not: "a dictionary", "an indiscriminate collection of information", "a crystal ball", "a how-to list"; or essays like Wikipedia:Listcruft, Wikipedia:Obscure topics, Wikipedia:Deny recognition,...; are not valid reasons for speedy deletion.
2. Less-obvious hoaxes. If even remotely plausible, a suspected hoax article should be subjected to further scrutiny in a wider forum. Truth is often stranger than fiction. Note that "blatant and obvious hoaxes and misinformation" are subject to speedy deletion as vandalism.
3. Original research. It is not always easy to tell whether an article consists of material that violates the policy against novel theories or interpretations or is simply unsourced.
4. Notability. Articles that seem to have obviously non-notable subjects are eligible for speedy deletion only if the article does not give a credible indication of why the subject might be important or significant.
5. Failure to assert importance but not an A7, A9 or A11 category. There is no consensus to speedily delete articles of types not specifically listed in A7, A9 or A11 under those criteria. Nor does it apply for neologisms that do not meet A11 because new specialized terms should have a wider hearing.
6. Author deletion requests made in bad faith. Author deletion requests made in bad faith, out of frustration, after others have contributed substantially (because the work of others is involved) or in an attempt to revoke their freely-licensed contributions are not granted. However, anyone may request deletion of pages in their userspace.
7. Very short articles. Short articles with sufficient content and context to qualify as stubs may not be speedily deleted under criteria A1 and A3; other criteria may still apply.
8. Copies that are not copyright violations. If content appears both here and somewhere else (possibly in modified form), consider the possibility that Wikipedia's is the original version and the other site copied from Wikipedia's version. Alternatively, the same author may have written both versions, or the original may be free content.
9. PNG / GIF files replaced by JPEG images. JPEG encoding discards information that may be important later. Do not delete the original PNG / GIF files.
10. Questionable material that is not vandalism. Earnest efforts are never vandalism, so to assume good faith, do not delete as vandalism unless reasonably certain.
11. User and user talk pages of IP addresses. Although users are encouraged to create Wikipedia accounts, unregistered users are still allowed to edit Wikipedia, and are identified by their IP addresses. If an unregistered user has a static IP address, it may have a user page and/or user talk page associated with it, and even for non-static IP addresses, the history can contain important discussions or information that may be of interest.
12. An article written in a foreign language or script. An article should not be speedily deleted just because it is not written in English. Instead it should be tagged with {{Not English}} and listed at Wikipedia:Pages needing translation into English. It may be reconsidered after translation whether the article merits deletion, retention or improvement by means of a suitable tag. However, if it already exists on another Wikimedia project, it might be speedily deletable under criterion A2.
13. Subject request. Sometimes somebody claiming to be the subject of a biographical article requests deletion of the article, or even blanks the article. Article subjects do not have an automatic right to have their articles deleted. Nor does such a criterion apply to namespaces other than article space: for example, pages in the Wikipedia namespace devoted to a discussion about a particular editor. See also: Wikipedia:Deletion policy § Deletion of biographies and BLPs
14. Orphaned pages or redirects. A page cannot be deleted just because no other pages link to it. This includes redirects – even if 'What links here' returns nothing, a redirect may be a likely search phrase, or have links to it from outside Wikipedia.
15. Redirects that are poorly targeted. A redirect should not be deleted just because its target is incorrect or confusing. Instead, change the redirect to a better target. If you're not sure where it should be targeted, open a discussion at Redirects for discussion.
16. Drafts covering the same topic as an existing mainspace article. These are not valid deletions under A10 (due to not being articles) nor G6. They can be replaced with a redirect to the mainspace article if necessary.

Procedure for administrators

See also: Wikipedia:Deletion process

Make sure to specify the reason for deletion in the deletion summary. Also, in general, the article's creator and major contributors should have been notified.

Before deleting a page, check the page history to assess whether it would instead be possible to revert and salvage a previous version, or there was actually a cut-and-paste move involved. Also:

• The initial edit summary may have information about the source of or reason for the page.
• The talk page may refer to previous deletion discussions or have ongoing discussion relevant to including the page.
• The page log may have information about previous deletions that could warrant SALTing the page or keeping it on good reason.
• What links here may show that the page is an oft-referred part of the encyclopedia, or may show other similar pages that warrant deletion. For pages that should not be re-created, incoming links in other pages (except in discussions, archives and tracking pages) should be removed.

If speedy deletion is inappropriate for a page:

1. Please remove the speedy deletion tag from the page. Doing so will automatically remove the page from Category:Candidates for speedy deletion.
2. Consider notifying the nominator, using {{speedy-decline}} or {{uw-csd}}. (If you're using CSD Helper, it will usually notify the nominator for you; it will normally use its own notification template.)

When deleting a page through the speedy deletion process, please specify the reason for deletion in the deletion summary, so that it will be recorded into the deletion log. Quoting page content in the deletion summary may be helpful, but must not be done for attack content or copyrighted text. In some cases, it would be appropriate to notify the page's creator of the deletion.

Twinkle or CSDHelper can be used to process nominations more quickly and smoothly. When processing a nomination:

• Twinkle can delete the page.
  • Twinkle can notify the page creator if the page is deleted.
• CSDH can delete the page, convert the nomination into a PROD nomination, or decline the nomination.
  • CSDH can notify the nominator if the nomination is converted or declined.

Obsolete

In the past, criteria beginning with the following letters were used:

• "P" for portals
• "T" for templates and modules

All criteria in these groups have been obsoleted; as such, these groups are not currently in use. Some criteria in the active groups were also used in the past but are no longer valid. They are kept here for historical reference and to preserve numbering. Two of the repealed criteria did not have consensus before being enacted, and two were meant to be temporary. The remainder were merged into broader criteria or deprecated entirely.

A4. Attempts to correspond with the person or group named by its title

Merged with and later superseded by "No content" (A3) in November 2005 as part of a bold rewrite that was made to simplify the CSD criterion (archived discussion 1, discussion 2, discussion 3).

A5. Transwikied articles

Was repealed in December 2022 due to lack of use (unopposed proposal). Instead, use Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Deleted articles that are temporarily restored to allow for a transwiki may be re-deleted under "technical deletion" (G6).

A6. Attack articles

Superseded by "Attack pages" (G10) in March 2006 (discussion).

A8. Blatant copyright infringement articles

Superseded by "Unambiguous copyright infringement" (G12) in October 2006 (unopposed proposal).

R1. Redirects to non-existent pages

Merged into "Pages dependent on a non-existent or deleted page" (G8) in September 2008 (discussion).

F7a. Non-free images or media with a clearly invalid fair-use tag

Repealed in March 2021 due to the problem being easily surmountable (discussion). Instead, the invalid tag should be corrected. Once the tag is corrected, other speedy deletion criteria may apply.

F10. Useless non-media files

Deprecated in favor of proposed deletion in February 2023 following rare usage and added technical restrictions on what file types can be uploaded (discussion).

C3. Categories solely populated from a template

Merged into "Pages dependent on a non-existent or deleted page" (G8) in October 2008 (discussion).

T1. Divisive and inflammatory templates

Enacted by Jimbo Wales without formally assessing consensus during the userbox wars. Was repealed in February 2009 (discussion). Instead, "attack pages" (G10) may be applicable in some cases; otherwise, use Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion for userboxes and Wikipedia:Templates for discussion for all other templates.

T2. Misrepresentation of policy

Was repealed in July 2020 following rare, often incorrect, use (discussion). Instead, "pure vandalism" (G3) may be applicable in some cases; otherwise, use Wikipedia:Templates for discussion.

T3. Duplication and hardcoded instances

Was repealed in December 2020 due to misuse and the seven day hold (discussion). Instead, use an existing applicable criterion or submit the template to Wikipedia:Templates for discussion.

T4. Subpages of non-existent pages

Merged into "Pages dependent on a non-existent or deleted page" (G8) in September 2008 (discussion).

U3. Non-free galleries

Was repealed in July 2021 since a bot automatically removes non-free images from user pages (discussion).

U4. Old IP address talk pages that meet specific criteria

Never enacted as policy anywhere, but deletions occurred nonetheless. Was repealed in March 2009 (discussion).

P1. Any portal that would be subject to speedy deletion as an article

Repealed in February 2023 following rare usage (discussion).

P2. Underpopulated portal

Repealed in February 2023 following rare usage (discussion).

X1. Redirects created by Neelix

Created as a G6 extension in December 2015 shortly after the discovery and arbitration case regarding 50,000+ questionable redirects created by the user Neelix, and later split into its own criterion. Was repealed in April 2018 after cleanup was completed (discussion). Instead, use Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion.

X2. Pages created by the content translation tool

Created to delete pages created by the content translation tool prior to 27 July 2016. Was deprecated in July 2017 when consensus agreed to move most of the remaining pages to the draft namespace (discussion).

See also

Find this page confusing? ; a volunteer will visit you there shortly!

• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Common outcomes
• Wikipedia:Alternative outlets
• Category:Candidates for speedy deletion
• Category:CSD warning templates
• Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion/Deletion templates
• Wikipedia:Deletion guidelines for administrators
• Wikipedia:Deletion review
• Wikipedia:No blank pages
• Wikipedia:Proposed deletion
• Wikipedia:Undeletion policy
• Wikipedia:What to do if your article gets CSD tagged
• Wikipedia:Over-hasty Speedy Deleters
• Wikipedia:Field guide to proper speedy deletion

Footnotes

A nomination to merge or rename, brought forward as a full CfD, may be speedily closed if the closing administrator is satisfied that:

• The nomination clearly falls within the scope of one of the criteria listed above, and;
• No objections have been made within 48 hours of the initial nomination.

If both these conditions are satisfied, the closure will be regarded as having been as a result of a speedy nomination. If any objections have been raised then the CfD nomination will remain in place for the usual 7-day discussion period, to be decided in accordance with expressed consensus.

Add requests for speedy renaming here

If the category and desired change do not match one of the criteria in C2 listed above, do not list it here. Instead, list it in the main CFD section.

If you are in any doubt as to whether it qualifies, do not list it here.

Use the following format:

* [[:Category:OLD name]] to [[:Category:NEW name]] – Reason for rename ~~~~

Don't forget to tag the category with {{subst:Cfr-speedy|newname}}

Please add new entries at the top of the list and sign and date stamp your entries with ~~~~.

A request may be completed if it is more than 48 hours old; that is, the time stamp shown is 16:59, 10 November 2024 (UTC) () or earlier.

---

Current nominations

• Category:Vice Chancellors of Loughborough University to Category:Vice-Chancellors of Loughborough University – Always hyphenated in British universities, as per every other subcat of Category:Vice-Chancellors by university in England. -- Necrothesp (talk) 22:35, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
• Category:Herzog albums to Category:Herzog (band) albums – C2D: Herzog (band) —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 22:24, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
• Category:Military units and formation of the Imperial German Navy to Category:Military units and formations of the Imperial German Navy – C2A: plural missing. Constantine ✍ 11:46, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
• Category:The Narrative (band) EPs to Category:The Narrative EPs – C2D: The Narrative —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 08:08, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Category:The Narrative (band) albums to Category:The Narrative albums
• Category:Menlo Owls football to Category:Menlo Oaks football - correct name of team per athletics site Billcasey905 (talk) 03:51, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Category:Menlo Owls football coaches to Category:Menlo Oaks football coaches

    Comment It's a C2B per Menlo Oaks. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 04:21, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

• Category:Canberra City SC players to Category:Canberra City FC players – name of club has changed. Change reflects name of mainspace article Canberra City FC. Hack (talk) 12:14, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
• Category:Suede songs to Category:Suede (band) songs – To match article mainspace Suede (band) Richhoncho (talk) 12:49, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Category:Suede members to Category:Suede (band) members
  • Category:Suede video albums to Category:Suede (band) video albums
  • Category:Suede albums to Category:Suede (band) albums
• Category:Cyrillic romanization to Category:Romanization of Cyrillic – C2D. Androoox (talk) 12:10, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

  Comment: While I appreciate that newbie user Androoox is very enthusiastic about cleaning up categories, templates, infoboxes, et al, I'm a little concerned that he/she is getting ahead of themselves and may be leaving a chaotic trail behind. Could someone please take a look at the plethora of changes in order to ensure that there won't need to be a huge clean-up? Other contributors and editors haven't had a chance to catch up and, being the New Year period, a large number are taking a break. I don't see any reason for any of this to be rushed to such a degree (and without discussion as regards a consensus-based general plan). Cheers! --Iryna Harpy (talk) 05:14, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

  See "Armbrust The Homunculus 22:13, 29 December 2013 (UTC)" who seemed to have checked my nominations of 29/30 Dec related to Macedonia, because s/he nominated something in exactly the same direction, very close in time and very close in the category tree. Every nomination by me was tagged with one of C2B, C2D. Maybe you can help to create Macedonian village articles - they exist in several other language editions (bg, mk, fr, ru, sq, sr) but not in English. Androoox (talk) 11:04, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

  As you may have noted, I haven't stated any objection to your developing the Macedonian portion of Wikipedia (otherwise I would have left a comment under one of the categories you've submitted below). My concern is that you've hit the ground running and are not following protocols. The majority of your changes have impacted on developed articles and categories everywhere in the world without so much as even a brief edit summary.

  A rare edit summary such as, "it is called "European Parliament"" isn't an edit summary but a statement. Please provide some indication that you've have identified it as being COMMONNAME and provide references.

  Also, be aware of Wikipedia history regarding certain matters.

  While I recognise that you're trying to do a quick clean-up and have made some commendable contributions, since opening your account on 21 December 2013, you've made nearly 500 edits. The majority of edits have taken place since 29 December. Of these, only 25 of have been to article talk pages with 22 being MOVES to a new talk page, not actual discussion on the talk page. You've made 20 alterations to templates, and have submitted 3 categories for speedy renaming and 5 alterations to Wikipedia categories in place. Alarm bells are ringing. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 23:13, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

• Category:Villages in Novaci municipality to Category:Villages in Novaci Municipality – C2B. Androoox (talk) 08:55, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
• Category:Villages in the Mogila municipality to Category:Villages in Mogila Municipality – C2B. Androoox (talk) 08:55, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
• Category:Villages in Demir Kapija municipality to Category:Villages in Demir Kapija Municipality – C2B: per Demir Kapija Municipality. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 22:13, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
• Category:Currency signs to Category:Currency symbols - C2D (currency sign moved to currency symbol). ▫ JohnnyMrNinja 16:19, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
• Category:Radoviš municipality to Category:Radoviš Municipality – C2D. Androoox (talk) 14:29, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
• Category:Jegunovce municipality to Category:Jegunovce Municipality – C2D. Androoox (talk) 14:29, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
• Category:Demir Kapija municipality to Category:Demir Kapija Municipality – C2D. Androoox (talk) 14:29, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
• Category:Bosilovo municipality to Category:Bosilovo Municipality – C2D. Androoox (talk) 14:29, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
• Category:Bitola municipality to Category:Bitola Municipality – C2D. Androoox (talk) 14:24, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
• Category:Solomonid dynasty to Category:Solomonic dynasty – C2D. BDD (talk) 20:22, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
• Category:Fictional U.S. states to Category:Fictional states of the United States – C2C: per Category:States of the United States. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 19:31, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

• Category:National parks of Alberta to Category:National parks in Alberta – C2C: Canada has national parks, not provinces. 117Avenue (talk) 02:25, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Category:National parks of Manitoba to Category:National parks in Manitoba
  • Category:National parks of the Northwest Territories‎ to Category:National parks in the Northwest Territories‎
  • Category:National parks of Ontario to Category:National parks in Ontario
  • Category:National parks of Quebec to Category:National parks in Quebec
  • Category:National parks of Saskatchewan to Category:National parks in Saskatchewan
  • Category:National parks of Yukon‎ to Category:National parks in Yukon‎

    Oppose speedy I don't see a clear convention for the proposed renamed in Category:National parks of Canada by province or territory. Contrary 7 categories use "of", and only 5 "in". Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 03:46, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

    Comment to @Homunculus: only one category (the Quebec one) existed prior to this week. The "of" for the following six were made in good faith based on the original, not knowing the uniqueness of Quebec's situation. See my recent comment below and this related discussion. Hwy43 (talk) 23:45, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

    Well that still doesn't change the fact, that it's now not the convention in the category. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 04:21, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

    Comment - A previous discussion resulted in the main category being renamed from Category:National parks of Canada to Category:National Parks of Canada, with a consensus to use this category tree only for federal parks (i.e., excluding Quebec). In light of this, it might be appropriate to rename all of the subcategories except Quebec to Category:National Parks in Foo. -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 05:52, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

    Comment - For all but Quebec, they should be Category:National parks in Foo. For Quebec, there should be two categories: Category:Canadian national parks in Quebec and Category:National parks of Quebec to distinguish between Canada's and Quebec's national parks respectively. Hwy43 (talk) 23:39, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

Opposed nominations

• Category:Lynn Fighting Knights men's soccer players to Category:Lynn Fighting Knights soccer players – Apparently moved to current by CFDS (though I can't find the nomination). Name is inappropriate as Lene Terp is not a man. Clavdia chauchat (talk) 12:08, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

  Oppose - here is the nomination, C2B was used as the rationale though I believe C2D would be a better rationale. As this category is a subcategory of Category:College men's soccer players in the United States, it was correct to rename the category. Whether Lene Terp should be included in this category or not, or whether the category should be renamed to not exclude women, should be discussed in a full discussion. Mentoz86 (talk) 13:19, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

  Comment - The article Lene Terp has been moved to the newly created Category:Lynn Fighting Knights women's soccer players. -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 06:04, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

• Category:Club Sol de América football managers to Category:Club Sol de América managers – C2C: these categories are named "managers" not "football managers" Mentoz86 (talk) 11:46, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

  Oppose speedy Club Sol de América is a multi-sport club. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 19:58, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

• Category:Greek courts of appeal to Category:Historical courts in Greece – C2B: both member articles are about courts that once existed, i.e. historical courts. Green Giant (talk) 04:03, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

  Oppose speedy. I could find no established naming convention for "Historical courts", and so I think that this requires a full nomination. -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 23:54, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

• Category:Judicial branch of Colombia to Category:Judicial Branch of Colombia – C2A: fix capitalisation per Judicial Branch of Colombia. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 06:21, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

  Oppose - Even if the article title is correctly capitalized, "Judicial branch of Colombia" is an appropriate descriptive title and a superior one, in my opinion. -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 02:31, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

• Category:Sportsperson-criminals to Category:Sportsperson–criminals – C2A: WP:endash Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 07:15, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Category:American athlete-criminals to Category:American athlete–criminals – C2A: ^ Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 07:15, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

    Oppose. These categories need to be deleted, and I will initiate a full nomination soon. -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 02:37, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

• Category:1905 Russian Revolution to Category:Revolution of 1905 – C2D per Revolution of 1905 Charles Essie (talk) 22:14, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Category:People of the 1905 Russian Revolution to Category:People of the Revolution of 1905

    Oppose. I propose to rename Revolution of 1905 to 1905 Russian Revolution, and Russian Revolution to 1917 Russian Revolution (due to disambig problems) and leave categories as is. 23:38, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

    Comment Proposing the renaming of articles should be made on the talk page (this isn't the right place for that). Also both titles were chosen in RM discussions (1905 & 1917). Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 23:53, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

    And what. First discussion was with only one support vote. Category tree in not clear here. Why is Category:1905 Russian Revolution included in Category:Russian Revolution, why does Category:1917 Russian Revolution exist? Oppose to renaming until clear cattree will be built. NickSt (talk) 11:11, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

    I have completed some of the needed cleanup of the category tree. However, it is necessary to allow the rename to proceed so that further cleanup can take place. -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 06:58, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

  Proposal, Category:1917 Russian Revolution should be deleted, it's redundent and serves no purpose. Charles Essie (talk) 01:36, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

  I have initiated a full discussion for that category. -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 06:58, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

• Category:Judicial branch of the Singapore Government to Category:Judicial system of Singapore – C2D: per Judicial system of Singapore. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 06:26, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Oppose for consistency with "Category:Legislative branch of the Singapore Government‎". — Cheers, JackLee ^–talk– 17:14, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

• Category:Scientology-related lawsuits to Category:Scientology litigation - C2C per established Category:Case law by party tree naming convention. RevelationDirect (talk) 01:17, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

  Oppose as proposed Scientology is a religious movement, and therefore not party in any case. Therefore this should be either renamed to Category:Scientology-related litigation. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 02:40, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

  That's a good observation. Should the category be removed from Category:Case law by party? -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 06:03, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

  I think we have two options there. Either (1) remove that category from the page or (2) rename it to Category:Church of Scientology litigation and purge any not related page. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 06:09, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

  There is a third option: splitting this category to Category:Church of Scientology litigation (subcategory of Category:Case law by party) and Category:Scientology case law (subcategory of Category:Case law by topic‎, and also a parent of Category:Church of Scientology litigation). -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 07:07, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

  You're right, I didn't thought about that. However, the last two possibilities would IMO need a full CFD. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 11:16, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

• Category:United States cases involving Jehovah's Witnesses to Category:United States Jehovah's Witnesses litigation - C2C per established Category:Case law by party tree naming convention. RevelationDirect (talk) 01:17, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

  Oppose The proposed target is a bit misleading and could imply, that the category contains litigations related to "United States Jehovah's Witnesses". I think "Jehovah's Witnesses litigation in the United States" would be better. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 02:40, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

• Category:Softball championships to Category:Softball competitions – C2C: per Category:Sports competitions by sport NickSt (talk) 11:29 pm, 8 December 2013, Sunday (8 days ago) (UTC+2)
  • Category:Squash tournaments to Category:Squash competitions
  • Category:Soft tennis tournaments to Category:Soft tennis competitions
  • Category:Roller skating championships to Category:Roller skating competitions
  • Category:Roller derby tournaments to Category:Roller derby competitions
  • Category:Inline hockey tournaments to Category:Inline hockey competitions
  • Category:Golf tournaments to Category:Golf competitions
  • Category:Flying disc tournaments to Category:Flying disc competitions
  • Category:Dog sledding races to Category:Dog sledding competitions
  • Category:Darts tournaments to Category:Darts competitions
  • Category:Cross-country skiing races to Category:Cross-country skiing competitions
  • Category:Badminton tournaments to Category:Badminton competitions
  • Category:Floorball Championships to Category:Floorball competitions

    Oppose this and all following Sports "something" to Sports competitions. The current category names seem to use the common term in the sport, as also used in articles and subcats. For example, most subcats of Category:Golf tournaments have "tournaments" in the name, and none have "competitions". There is no reason to say "competitions" about all sports when they use different terms. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:02, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

    Oppose no rationale for changing some categories to a non-standard and leaving a huge number with the standard name. Golf tournaments is also more accurate and descriptive. 2005 (talk) 05:19, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

• Category:Záhonyi VSC players to Category:Záhonyi VSC footballers – C2C: per the convention of Category:Footballers in Hungary by club. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 15:46, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Category:Zalaegerszegi TE players to Category:Zalaegerszegi TE footballers
  • Category:Vác FC players to Category:Dunakanyar-Vác FC footballers (also C2D per Dunakanyar-Vác FC)
  • Category:Videoton FC players to Category:Videoton FC footballers
  • Category:Várda SE players to Category:Várda SE footballers
  • Category:Újpest FC players to Category:Újpest FC footballers
  • Category:FC Tatabánya players to Category:FC Tatabánya footballers
  • Category:Soproni VSE players to Category:Soproni VSE footballers
  • Category:FC Sopron players to Category:FC Sopron footballers
  • Category:Répcelak SE players to Category:Répcelak SE footballers
  • Category:Pécsi Mecsek FC players to Category:Pécsi MFC footballers (also C2D per Pécsi MFC)
  • Category:Pálhalma SE players to Category:Pálhalma SE footballers
  • Category:Puskás FC players to Category:Puskás Akadémia FC footballers (also C2D per Puskás Akadémia FC)
  • Category:Orosháza FC players to Category:Orosháza FC footballers
  • Category:Nyíregyháza Spartacus FC players to Category:Nyíregyháza Spartacus FC footballers
  • Category:Nyírbátori FC players to Category:Nyírbátori FC footballers
  • Category:Mátészalka FC players to Category:Mátészalka FC footballers
  • Category:MTK Budapest FC players to Category:MTK Budapest FC footballers
  • Category:Monori SE players to Category:Monori SE footballers
  • Category:Mezőkovácsháza TE players to Category:Mezőkovácsháza TE footballers
  • Category:Létavértes SC players to Category:Létavértes SC footballers
  • Category:Kaposvári Rákóczi FC players to Category:Kaposvári Rákóczi FC footballers
  • Category:Hajdúszoboszlói SE players to Category:Hajdúszoboszlói SE footballers
  • Category:Győri ETO FC players to Category:Győri ETO FC footballers
  • Category:Gyulai Termál FC players to Category:Gyulai Termál FC footballers
  • Category:Dunaújváros FC players to Category:Dunaújváros FC footballers
  • Category:Dunaújváros PASE players to Category:Dunaújváros PASE footballers
  • Category:Debreceni VSC players to Category:Debreceni VSC footballers
  • Category:Csákvári TK players to Category:Csákvári TK footballers
  • Category:Budapest Honvéd FC II players to Category:Budapest Honvéd FC II footballers
  • Category:BFC Siófok players to Category:BFC Siófok footballers
  • Category:Balmazújvárosi FC players to Category:Balmazújvárosi FC footballers
  • Category:Algyő SK players to Category:Algyő SK footballers

    Oppose - With some exceptions (e.g., "players" instead of "footballers" for American clubs), I think that the choice to use "player" or "footballer" may have more to do with the type of club (i.e., football club versus multi-sport club) than the country in which it is located. For example, "Foo FC players" may be preferable to "Foo FC footballers", which would be read as "Foo Football Club footballers". On the other hand, "Foo SC players", read as "Foo Sports Club players", may be ambiguous when the club is a multi-sport club. -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 17:45, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

    Comment. All other subcategories from Category:Association football players by club have format Club X players. Maybe rename all subcats to this format. No clear convention in Hungary cattree: 84 footballers, 33 players NickSt (talk) 23:34, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

    I don't believe that either format is used consistently—see, for example, Category:Footballers in Mexico by club‎—although it would be desirable to put some kind of clear standard in place. -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 05:34, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

• Category:Wikipedia categories named after cities and towns in Italy to Category:Wikipedia categories named after cities in Italy – C2C: Remove "and towns" to match with other subcategories of Category:Wikipedia categories named after cities.  Senator2029 ➔ “Talk”  16:00, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Category:Wikipedia categories named after cities and towns in Germany to Category:Wikipedia categories named after cities in Germany

    Oppose for both:IMO it would be much better to rename them to Category:Wikipedia categories named after populated places in Germany resp. Category:Wikipedia categories named after populated places in Italy. Please check at Category:Wikipedia categories named after populated places. The after cities in Germany / Italy categories (if wanted/needed) would be subcategories of those. As of now at least the Category:Wikipedia categories named after cities and towns in Germany contains some places which are neither cities nor towns, but villages (populated places), so that category would eventually be needed anyway. And most of the towns mentioned there shouldn't be classified as cities either. Kleeblatt187 (talk) 19:18, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

• Category:The Muppets songs to Category:Songs from The Muppets – C2C per the convention of Category:Songs from films. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 23:41, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

  The Muppets is a franchise that included both films and television series. The convention for television series is not as clear-cut as it is for films; see, for example, Category:Glee (TV series) songs, Category:Sesame Street songs, and Category:South Park songs. -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 21:18, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

On hold pending other discussion

• Category:British fascist movements to Category:Fascist parties in the United Kingdom – C2C. Tim! (talk) 09:23, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

  Not all members of Category:British fascist movements are political parties. -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 17:54, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

  • Formal Oppose, then. I have started a discussion on a new category level for fascist movements at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Politics/Political parties#Parties and movements. – Fayenatic London 10:18, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

Moved to full discussion

• Category:Carry On films to Category:Carry On (franchise) films – C2.B, per Carry On (franchise) and Category:Carry On (franchise). -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 05:09, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

  Oppose I think the films in the category name is sufficient disambiguation from other entries on Carry On, and I prefer the more natural sounding category name. Tim! (talk) 09:16, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

  Moved to a full discussion. -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 06:31, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

• Category:See also templates to Category:See-also templates or Category:"See also" templates – Missing hyphen, otherwise use quotemarks. 213.246.83.192 (talk) 15:51, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

  Oppose. I don't see why a hyphen is required. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 10:45, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

  I think the goal is to clarify that the title is not written in the imperative mood, and instead that it contains a compound modifier. -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 05:59, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

  Yes, that's it exactly.
  Another possibility is Category:"See also" templates, but the quotemarks might overly complicate the category's ordering in alphabetical lists, etc. 213.246.83.192 (talk) 12:15, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

  How about Category:Related topic templates? – Fayenatic London 00:51, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

  That's a better title, but not speediable, so it would need a full discussion. After seeing Black Falcon's explanation I was going to withdraw my objection to the speedy ... but I will sustain it to allow a full discussion on FL's proposal. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 09:24, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

  Incidentally, to avoid ambiguity, it'd be Category:Related-topic templates. 213.246.83.192 (talk) 13:18, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

  Now at CFD Dec 23. – Fayenatic London 21:58, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

• Category:Female cinematographers to Category:Women cinematographers – C2C: per Category:Women in film Tim! (talk) 10:12, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

  Oppose - It is natural that a topic category, such as Category:Women in film, should use "Women" as a noun instead of "Females". It does not follow, however, that a set category such as Category:Female cinematographers ought to use "Women" as an adjective. Also, changes of 'Female' to 'Women', or vice versa, have been discussed before (most recently, in April 2013, without a clear consensus emerging. -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 23:44, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

  Listed at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2013 December 23#Category:Female cinematographers. Tim! (talk) 07:24, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

• Category:Female television directors to Category:Women television directors – this was tagged on 8 September by QuasyBoy (talk · contribs), I imagine not added to this page. C2C per Category:Women in television would seem to apply.. Tim! (talk) 10:10, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

  Oppose - It is natural that a topic category, such as Category:Women in television, should use "Women" as a noun instead of "Females". It does not follow, however, that a set category such as Category:Female television directors ought to use "Women" as an adjective. In addition, the main list for the category is List of female film and television directors. Also, changes of 'Female' to 'Women', or vice versa, have been discussed before (most recently, in April 2013, without a clear consensus emerging. -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 23:44, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

  Listed at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2013 December 23#Category:Female television directors. Tim! (talk) 07:24, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

• Category:Kōji Seo to Category:Kouji Seo – Author has been romanized as Kouji Seo by localization. DragonZero (Talk · Contribs) 03:36, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

  Comment That's a C2D per Kouji Seo. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 04:04, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

  I have initiated a full discussion in order to consider deletion. -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 01:53, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

• Category:Adoption, fostering, orphan care and displacement to Category:Child displacement. C2D: according to the lead of main article Child displacement, this much shorter term would seem to cover all the bases, if I understand correctly. If so, let's seize the opportunity. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:49, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

  I favor a shorter name, but the contents of the article Child displacement do not match what I would expect to see in a main article covering the topics of adoption, fostering, and orphan care. That's not to say that the proposed rename is not the best one, but just that a discussion might be useful in this case. -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 23:43, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

  What's missing from the scope outlined in Child displacement? Shawn in Montreal (talk) 05:11, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

  That article focuses on the "removal or separation of children" but makes only passing mention of the subsequent possible stages of adoption, fostering, or orphan care. It would make sense, however, to include those topics under the general heading of 'child displacement', so consider my objection withdrawn. -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 05:55, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

  Thanks. That was my point in specifying that the WP:LEAD offers a summary of the article topic that does encompass the scope, whatever the state of the rest of the text. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:18, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

  Oppose from me, as I do not think the above is clear-cut, and therefore this is not within the speedy criteria. A full discussion would be appropriate. Upmerging to category:child welfare might be better, as some of the contents of the nominated category are direct members/subcats of that parent. – Fayenatic London 00:48, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

  Okay, taken to CfD. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:30, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

  Full discussion is at 2013 Dec 17. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 16:16, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

• Category:Inactive extraterrestrial probes to Category:Inactive space probes Category:Derelict space probes – C2C: Per Category:Space probes NickSt (talk) 14:02, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

  OPPOSE SUPPORT—I think "Category:Derelict space probes would be better name for the NEW category, providing both more information (the object is derelict moving in space in some orbit, not merely inactive and lying still somewhere) and it would be more consistent with a set of other Categories in the English Wikipedia (e.g., Category:Derelict satellites in heliocentric orbit or Category:Derelict satellites orbiting Mars) Cheers. N2e (talk) 14:16, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

  Ok, I agree with Category:Derelict space probes name. For example, Derelict Russian space probe crashes to Earth. NickSt (talk) 14:25, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

  Sounds like both of us support the speedy name change now, and are in agreement for a good new name. I've put strikethrough my ealier oppose and clarified that I support the speedy rename. N2e (talk) 15:57, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

• Category:Destroyed extraterrestrial probes to Category:Destroyed space probes – C2C: per Category:Space probes NickSt (talk) 13:55, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
• Category:Extraterrestrial probes to Category:Active space probes – C2C: per Category:Space probes. This is a category for active space probes. NickSt (talk) 13:51, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

  Oppose above three. IMO C2C isn't applicable to remove the word "extraterrestrial" from the title of the categories. They could only be renamed to Category:Derelict extraterrestrial space probes, Category:Destroyed extraterrestrial space probes and Category:Extraterrestrial space probes. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 18:14, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

  No such problems. Extraterrestrial probe is a full equivalent (synonyme) for space probe. Space probe is a spacecraft that leaves an Earth orbit. NickSt (talk) 18:26, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

  Sources, that say they are the same? Even if its true, the addition of the word "active" remains unspeediable. Also because Category:Inactive extraterrestrial land probes is a subcategory of Category:Inactive extraterrestrial probes, therefore the word should remain in that too. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 18:30, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

  Sources, that say they are not the same? What difference? If you don't want to help, please don't prevent the usefull renaming. NickSt (talk) 19:07, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

  I mean't, "Where are the sources, that they are the same?". I thought that was clear. The redirect was created by you just today, and the target article doesn't even mention it. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 19:08, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

  You are a sofist? Extraterrestrial probe = space probe, the same as 2x2=4. I thought that was clear. It is a trivial for all, but not for u. NickSt (talk) 19:21, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

  All three of them is now at full discussion at 2013 Dec 16. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 23:26, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

• Category:Mexican Judicial Branch of Government to Category:Judicial branch of the Mexican government‎ – C2C: The name should match Category:Executive branch of the Mexican government Green Giant (talk) 00:47, 12 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Category:Mexican Legislative Branch of Government to Category:Legislative branch of the Mexican government‎

    Oppose speedy There is no clear naming convention for this category three, and therefore C2C doesn't apply. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 10:07, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

    Comment - fair point, but I think both categories need a name which doesn't begin with "Mexican" and which doesn't have so many capitalized words. Maybe something like Category:Legislatures of Mexico (as it has only two members categories, covering federal and state legislatures) and Category:Judiciary of Mexico/Category:Federal judiciary of Mexico (the only members currently being just federal judicial articles)? Green Giant (talk) 12:46, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

    Oppose. Per Armbrust, C2C does not apply, so this needs a full discussion.
    There is a further problem that concepts such as "Judicial Branch of Government" are part of the constitutional theory of the United States, and are not necessarily applicable to other countries. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 12:53, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

    Arguably Mexico and many other nearby countries are influenced by US ideas, but I agree this needs full discussion. Remind me again, is there a procedure for moving to full discussion or do we wait until this gets to the bottom of the pile? Green Giant (talk) 13:35, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

    Just list it at full CFD, and than move this discussion to the "Moved to full discussion" section and add a link to the logpage where the discussion is. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 15:53, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

    Both categories are now at full discussion. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 06:00, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

• Category:St. Louis sports players to Category:St. Louis, Missouri sports players – C2C. Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 00:09, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

  Moved to full discussion, in order to consider deletion. -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 05:11, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

• Category:Solitary Animals to Category:Solitary animals – C2A Eric ^talk 23:18, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

  Comment Now at full discussion. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 12:21, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

• Category:Tintin to Category:The Adventures of Tintin – C2D: per The Adventures of Tintin. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 23:16, 22 November 2013 (UTC)
  • Category:Tintin characters to Category:The Adventures of Tintin characters
  • Category:Tintin films to Category:The Adventures of Tintin films
  • Category:Tintin books to Category:The Adventures of Tintin books
  • Category:Video games based on Tintin to Category:Video games based on The Adventures of Tintin
  • Category:Tintin locations to Category:The Adventures of Tintin locations
  • Category:Tintin lists to Category:The Adventures of Tintin lists
  • Category:Tintin images to Category:The Adventures of Tintin images

    Comment: I'm not sure these should be speedied, as there was no consensus at a full CFD in 2012. – Fayenatic London 08:42, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

    Comment Moved them to full discussion. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 16:53, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

    Relisted at December 2. – Fayenatic London 19:16, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

• Category:FGM victims to Category:Female genital mutilation victims – C2B per Category:Female genital mutilation/female genital mutilation Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 00:08, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

  Comment Not eligible for speedy, as category is at full discussion. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 07:25, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

  I nominated it for speedy before it was nominated for a full discussion. But that's fine if a user wants to move it to a full. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 18:32, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

• Category:Tate Gallery to Category:Tate – C2D, and to some degree C2C with Category:People associated with the Tate and Category:Collection of the Tate. --BDD (talk) 17:50, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Category:Directors of the Tate Gallery to Category:Directors of the Tate

    Oppose - while "Tate" might well be a WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for the article, it is ambiguous for the category, see Tate (disambiguation), also Tait is similar enough for potential confusion. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 22:28, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

    Comment Now at full discussion. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 14:04, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

    Comment Was relisted at 2013 Dec 25. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 22:22, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

• Category:Healthcare management to Category:Health care management – C2C: Category:Health care. Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 19:37, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Category:Healthcare occupations to Category:Health care occupations
    • Category:Traditional healthcare occupations to Category:Traditional health care occupations
    • Category:Healthcare occupations in the United Kingdom to Category:Health care occupations in the United Kingdom
  • Category:Healthcare quality to Category:Health care quality
  • Category:Healthcare by city to Category:Health care by city
    • Category:Healthcare in Bangkok to Category:Health care in Bangkok
    • Category:Healthcare in Berlin to Category:Health care in Berlin
    • Category:Healthcare in Bristol to Category:Health care in Bristol
    • Category:Healthcare in Dhaka to Category:Health care in Dhaka
    • Category:Healthcare in Montreal to Category:Health care in Montreal
    • Category:Healthcare in Vienna to Category:Health care in Vienna
    • Category:Healthcare in Zürich to Category:Health care in Zürich
    • Category:Health in Calgary to Category:Health care in Calgary (also C2D: per Health care in Calgary)
  • Category:Healthcare journals to Category:Health care journals (also C2A: per List of health care journals)
  • Category:Healthcare software to Category:Health care software
    • Category:Free healthcare software to Category:Free health care software
  • Category:Types of healthcare facilities to Category:Types of health care facilities
  • Category:Universal healthcare to Category:Universal health care (also C2D: per Universal health care)
  • Category:Healthcare companies of France to Category:Health care companies of France (also C2C: per Category:Health care companies by country)
  • Category:Healthcare reform to Category:Health care reform (also C2D per Health care reform)
    • Category:Healthcare reform in the United States to Category:Health care reform in the United States (also C2D per Health care reform in the United States)
      • Category:Healthcare reform in the United States by state to Category:Health care reform in the United States by state
        • Category:Healthcare reform in California to Category:Health care reform in California
        • Category:Healthcare reform in Maryland to Category:Health care reform in Maryland
        • Category:Healthcare reform in Oregon to Category:Health care reform in Oregon
        • Category:Healthcare reform in Washington (state) to Category:Health care reform in Washington (state)
      • Category:Healthcare reform legislation in the United States to Category:Health care reform legislation in the United States
  • Category:Healthcare navigational boxes to Category:Health care navigational boxes
  • Category:Healthcare in the United States to Category:Health care in the United States
    • Category:Healthcare in the United States by state to Category:Health care in the United States by state
      • Category:Healthcare in Alabama to Category:Health care in Alabama
      • Category:Healthcare in Alaska to Category:Health care in Alaska
      • Category:Healthcare in Arizona to Category:Health care in Arizona
      • Category:Healthcare in Arkansas to Category:Health care in Arkansas
      • Category:Healthcare in California to Category:Health care in California
        • Category:Healthcare in the San Francisco Bay Area to Category:Health care in the San Francisco Bay Area
      • Category:Healthcare in Colorado to Category:Health care in Colorado
      • Category:Healthcare in Connecticut to Category:Health care in Connecticut
      • Category:Healthcare in Delaware to Category:Health care in Delaware
      • Category:Healthcare in Florida to Category:Health care in Florida
      • Category:Healthcare in Georgia (U.S. state) to Category:Health care in Georgia (U.S. state)
      • Category:Healthcare in Hawaii to Category:Health care in Hawaii
      • Category:Healthcare in Idaho to Category:Health care in Idaho
      • Category:Healthcare in Illinois to Category:Health care in Illinois
      • Category:Healthcare in Indiana to Category:Health care in Indiana
      • Category:Healthcare in Iowa to Category:Health care in Iowa
      • Category:Healthcare in Kansas to Category:Health care in Kansas
      • Category:Healthcare in Kentucky to Category:Health care in Kentucky
      • Category:Healthcare in Louisiana to Category:Health care in Louisiana
      • Category:Healthcare in Maine to Category:Health care in Maine
      • Category:Healthcare in Maryland to Category:Health care in Maryland
      • Category:Healthcare in Massachusetts to Category:Health care in Massachusetts
      • Category:Healthcare in Michigan to Category:Health care in Michigan
      • Category:Healthcare in Minnesota to Category:Health care in Minnesota
      • Category:Healthcare in Mississippi to Category:Health care in Mississippi
      • Category:Healthcare in Montana to Category:Health care in Montana
      • Category:Healthcare in Missouri to Category:Health care in Missouri
        • Category:Healthcare in St. Louis County, Missouri to Category:Health care in St. Louis County, Missouri
      • Category:Healthcare in Nebraska to Category:Health care in Nebraska
      • Category:Healthcare in Nevada to Category:Health care in Nevada
      • Category:Healthcare in New Hampshire to Category:Health care in New Hampshire
      • Category:Healthcare in New Jersey to Category:Health care in New Jersey
      • Category:Heathcare in New Mexico to Category:Heath care in New Mexico
      • Category:Healthcare in New York to Category:Health care in New York
      • Category:Heathcare in North Carolina to Category:Heath care in North Carolina
      • Category:Healthcare in North Dakota to Category:Health care in North Dakota
      • Category:Healthcare in Ohio to Category:Health care in Ohio
      • Category:Healthcare in Oklahoma to Category:Health care in Oklahoma
      • Category:Healthcare in Oregon to Category:Health care in Oregon
      • Category:Healthcare in Pennsylvania to Category:Health care in Pennsylvania
      • Category:Healthcare in Rhode Island to Category:Health care in Rhode Island
      • Category:Healthcare in South Carolina to Category:Health care in South Carolina
      • Category:Healthcare in South Dakota to Category:Health care in South Dakota
      • Category:Healthcare in Tennessee to Category:Health care in Tennessee
      • Category:Healthcare in Texas to Category:Health care in Texas
      • Category:Healthcare in Utah to Category:Health care in Utah
      • Category:Healthcare in Vermont to Category:Health care in Vermont
      • Category:Healthcare in Virginia to Category:Health care in Virginia
      • Category:Healthcare in Washington (state) to Category:Health care in Washington (state)
      • Category:Healthcare in West Virginia to Category:Health care in West Virginia
      • Category:Healthcare in Wyoming to Category:Health care in Wyoming
      • Category:Healthcare in Washington, D.C. to Category:Health care in Washington, D.C.
    • Category:Healthcare by city of the United States to Category:Health care by city of the United States
      • Category:Healthcare in Boston, Massachusetts to Category:Health care in Boston, Massachusetts
      • Category:Healthcare in Buffalo, New York to Category:Health care in Buffalo, New York
      • Category:Healthcare in Charlotte, North Carolina to Category:Health care in Charlotte, North Carolina
      • Category:Healthcare in Chicago, Illinois to Category:Health care in Chicago, Illinois
      • Category:Healthcare in Cleveland, Ohio to Category:Health care in Cleveland, Ohio
      • Category:Healthcare in Cumberland, MD-WV-PA to Category:Health care in Cumberland, MD-WV MSA
      • Category:Healthcare in Dallas, Texas to Category:Health care in Dallas, Texas
      • Category:Healthcare in Dayton, Ohio to Category:Health care in Dayton, Ohio
      • Category:Healthcare in Galveston, Texas to Category:Health care in Galveston, Texas
      • Category:Healthcare in Greensboro, North Carolina to Category:Health care in Greensboro, North Carolina
      • Category:Healthcare in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania to Category:Health care in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania
      • Category:Healthcare in Houston, Texas to Category:Health care in Houston, Texas
      • Category:Healthcare in Indianapolis, Indiana to Category:Health care in Indianapolis, Indiana
      • Category:Healthcare in Las Vegas, Nevada to Category:Health care in Las Vegas, Nevada
      • Category:Healthcare in Los Angeles, California to Category:Health care in Los Angeles, California
      • Category:Healthcare in New Orleans, Louisiana to Category:Health care in New Orleans, Louisiana
      • Category:Healthcare in New York City to Category:Health care in New York City
      • Category:Healthcare in Oakland, California to Category:Health care in Oakland, California
      • Category:Healthcare in Omaha, Nebraska to Category:Health care in Omaha, Nebraska
      • Category:Healthcare in Orlando, Florida to Category:Health care in Orlando, Florida
      • Category:Healthcare in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania to Category:Health care in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
      • Category:Healthcare in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania to Category:Health care in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
      • Category:Healthcare in Portland, Oregon to Category:Health care in Portland, Oregon
      • Category:Healthcare in Raleigh, North Carolina to Category:Health care in Raleigh, North Carolina
      • Category:Healthcare in Richmond, Virginia to Category:Health care in Richmond, Virginia
      • Category:Healthcare in San Antonio, Texas to Category:Health care in San Antonio, Texas
      • Category:Healthcare in San Francisco, California to Category:Health care in San Francisco, California
      • Category:Healthcare in Springfield, Massachusetts to Category:Health care in Springfield, Massachusetts

        Oppose speedy on all health care items. There is clearly not consensus on which version to use based on how many places it is a single word, so we really should do a full discussion. I don't care which form to use, but thise should not be a speedy issue. Aboutmovies (talk) 19:17, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

        I'm not sure which form is more common but the health care title has been stable since 2003. Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 19:45, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

        That doesn't quite matter: C2C "This criterion should only be applied when there is no ambiguity or doubt over the existence of a category naming convention. Such a convention must be well defined and must be overwhelmingly used within the tree. If this is not the case then the category in question must be brought forward to a full Cfd nomination." Again, just look at how many cats you are looking to rename. Ergo, there is some doubt and it needs to go to a full CFD nom. Aboutmovies (talk) 06:11, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

        Comment Moved all above to full discussion. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 09:41, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Please also see ongoing: Category talk:Health care in Russia#Contested deletion. XOttawahitech (talk) 04:16, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

Ready for deletion

Check Category:Empty categories awaiting deletion for out of process deletions. In some cases, these will need to be nominated for discussion and the editor who emptied the category informed that they should follow the WP:CFD process.

Once the renaming has been completed, copy and paste the listing to the Ready for deletion section of Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Working/Manual.