Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Speedy

Categories may be listed for speedy renaming or speedy merging if they meet one or more of the criteria specified below. They must be tagged with {{subst:cfr-speedy|New name}} so that users of the categories are aware of the proposal. A request may be processed 48 hours after it was listed if there are no objections. This delay allows other editors to review the request to ensure that it meets the criteria for speedy deletion, renaming or merging, and to raise objections to the proposed change.

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

Contested requests become stale, and can be un-tagged and de-listed, after 7 days of inactivity. Optionally, if the discussion may be useful for future reference, it may be copied to the category talk page, with a section heading and {{moved discussion from|[[WP:CFDS]]|2=~~~~}}. If the nominator wants to continue the process, they need to submit the request as a regular CfD in accordance with 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 (3)

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 (1), 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 targets 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 (2), 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 (1)

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 (0)

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 (1)

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 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 (3)

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 (197), 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 (5)

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 here,
  • 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 and merging here

If the category and desired change do not match one of the criteria mentioned in C2, 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 on a new line at the beginning of the list:

* [[:Category:{old name here}]] to [[:Category:{new name here}]] – {reason for rename here} ~~~~

This will sign and datestamp an entry automatically.

Remember to tag the category with: {{subst:Cfr-speedy|New name}}

A request may be completed if it is more than 48 hours old; that is, if the time stamp shown is earlier than 18:12, 1 November 2024 (UTC). Currently, there are 216 open requests ().

---

Current nominations

• Category:Public policy of South America to Category:Public policy in South America – C2E. PanchoS (talk) 09:32, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
• Category:Public policy of North America to Category:Public policy in North America – C2E. PanchoS (talk) 09:32, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
• Category:Public policy of Oceania to Category:Public policy in Oceania – C2E. PanchoS (talk) 09:32, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
• Category:Public policy of Europe to Category:Public policy in Europe – C2E. PanchoS (talk) 09:32, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
• Category:Public policy of Asia to Category:Public policy in Asia – C2E. PanchoS (talk) 09:31, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
• Category:Energy policy of Oceania to Category:Energy policy in Oceania – C2E. PanchoS (talk) 09:29, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
• Category:Energy policy of South America to Category:Energy policy in South America – C2E. PanchoS (talk) 09:29, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
• Category:Energy policy of North America to Category:Energy policy in North America – C2E. PanchoS (talk) 09:28, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
• Category:Energy policy of Africa to Category:Energy policy in Africa – C2E. PanchoS (talk) 09:28, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
• Category:Energy policy in Russia to Category:Energy policy of Russia – C2D: per main article Energy policy of Russia. PanchoS (talk) 09:00, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
• Category:Energy policy in the United States to Category:Energy policy of the United States – C2D: per main article Energy policy of the United States. PanchoS (talk) 09:00, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
• Category:Energy policy in Malaysia to Category:Energy policy of Malaysia – C2D: per main article Energy policy of Malaysia. PanchoS (talk) 08:59, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
• Category:Television series genre by country to Category:Television series by country and genre – C2C, standard naming for categories by two parameters. – Fayenatic London 08:43, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
• Category:Walloon Parliament to Category:Parliament of Wallonia – C2D: per Parliament of Wallonia. Tim! (talk) 17:57, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Category:Members of the Walloon Parliament to Category:Members of the Parliament of Wallonia
• Category:U.S. state cabinets to Category:United States state cabinets – C2B. Tim! (talk) 17:18, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
• Category:Finmeccanica to Category:Leonardo-Finmeccanica – Rebranding --Luciana Musumeci (talk) 13:57, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
• Category:Agra Gharana to Category:Agra gharana – C2D. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 10:04, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
• Category:Patiala Gharana to Category:Patiala gharana – C2D. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 10:03, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
• Category:Members of the Hessian Parliament to Category:Members of the Landtag of Hesse – C2D: per head article Landtag of Hesse. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 22:57, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
• Category:Modi'in to Category:Modi'in-Maccabim-Re'ut – C2D: per Modi'in-Maccabim-Re'ut Tim! (talk) 11:13, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

• Category:Sports organizations established in the 20th century to Category:Sports organisations established in the 20th century – C2C: perCategory:Sports organisations by century of establishment, Category:Sports organisations by date of establishment Tim! (talk) 10:42, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Category:Sports organizations established in the 21st century to Category:Sports organisations established in the 21st century 
• Category:Philippine Revolution people to Category:People of the Philippine Revolution – C2C per convention at Category:19th-century people by conflict. RioHondo (talk) 03:33, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
• Category:Royal British Legion to Category:The Royal British Legion – C2D: per The Royal British Legion Tim! (talk) 07:18, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
• Category:Retro style automobiles to Category:Retro-style automobiles – C2D: Retro-style automobile —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 05:16, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
• Category:Filipino comedy and humor to Category:Philippine comedy and humor – C2C: Category:Philippine culture. RioHondo (talk) 21:48, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
• Category:Filipino filmographies to Category:Philippine filmographies – C2C: Category:Philippine films. RioHondo (talk) 21:48, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
• Category:Films about Philippine gangsters to Category:Films about Filipino gangsters – C2C: Category:Films about Filipino criminals.RioHondo (talk) 21:48, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
• Category:Viva Communications to Category:Viva Entertainment – C2D: Viva Entertainment. RioHondo (talk) 21:48, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
• Category:Independent Film production companies of the Philippines to Category:Independent film production companies of the Philippines – C2A. RioHondo (talk) 21:48, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
• Category:Sikhism in the Philippinesa to Category:Sikhism in the Philippines – C2A. RioHondo (talk) 21:14, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
• Category:Southern Philippine languages to Category:Mindanao languages – C2D: Mindanao languages. RioHondo (talk) 21:12, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
• Category:Oldest people ever to Category:Oldest people – C2D per Oldest people. Brandmeister^talk 21:06, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
• Category:Philippines disability organizations to Category:Philippine disability organizations – C2C per convention at Category:Disability organizations by country. RioHondo (talk) 20:20, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
• Category:Regional Science High Schools to Category:Regional Science High School Union – C2D: Regional Science High School Union. RioHondo (talk) 20:20, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
• Category:Research Universities in the Philippines to Category:Research universities in the Philippines – C2A. RioHondo (talk) 20:20, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
• Category:British schools in the Philippines to Category:British international schools in the Philippines – C2C: Category:British international schools. RioHondo (talk) 20:20, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
• Category:British rule of the Philippines to Category:British invasion of Manila – C2D: British invasion of Manila. RioHondo (talk) 19:41, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
• Category:Vanessa L. Williams songs to Category:Vanessa Williams songs – C2D as article was moved recently to Vanessa Williams. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 17:05, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
• Category:JJ Cale albums to Category:J. J. Cale albums – per recent move of JJ Cale to J. J. Cale Rob Sinden (talk) 12:56, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
• Category:JJ Cale songs to Category:J. J. Cale songs – per recent move of JJ Cale to J. J. Cale Rob Sinden (talk) 12:56, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
• Category:Senators of the Kingdom of Italy to Category:Members of the Senate of the Kingdom of Italy – C2C per Category:Members of the Italian Senate and subcategories. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 02:17, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
• Category:Veracruz, Veracruz to Category:Veracruz (city) – C2D per Veracruz (city) Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 23:52, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Category:People from Veracruz, Veracruz to Category:People from Veracruz (city)
• Category:Greenhorn Mountains (California) to Category:Greenhorn Mountains – C2D per Greenhorn Mountains Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 23:46, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
• Category:Northern Cyprus media to Category:Media in Northern Cyprus – C2C: per Category:Media by country Tim! (talk) 19:09, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
• Category:Rivers in Thrissur district to Category:Rivers of Thrissur district – C2C: All other categories related to geographical features use the "of" form, not the "in" form עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 10:04, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
• Category:Rivers in Thiruvananthapuram to Category:Rivers of Thiruvananthapuram – C2C: All other categories related to geographical features use the "of" form, not the "in" form עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 10:03, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
• Category:Rivers in Kollam district to Category:Rivers of Kollam district – C2C: All other categories related to geographical features use the "of" form, not the "in" form. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 10:02, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
• Category:Beetles of Britain to Category:Beetles of Great Britain – C2C: Britain (place name) is just a synonym of the island of Great Britain, so we should follow parent Category:Fauna of Great Britain. PanchoS (talk) 22:25, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
• Category:Resident Commissioners from the Philippines to Category:Resident Commissioners of the Philippines – C2D: Resident Commissioner of the Philippines. RioHondo (talk) 20:21, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
• Category:Lists of United States companies by industry to Category:Lists of companies of the United States by industry – C2C, per WP:CATNAME#Companies. Funandtrvl (talk) 19:16, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
• Category:Bibliographies of food to Category:Bibliographies of food and drink – C2C: per parent categories PanchoS (talk) 17:19, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
• Category:Jose Rizal University to Category:José Rizal University – C2A/C2D: José Rizal University. RioHondo (talk) 14:03, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Category:Jose Rizal University alumni to Category:José Rizal University alumni
• Category:Hong Kong democracy movement to Category:Hong Kong democracy movements – C2C: also to avoid the suggestion of this being a single, homogenous movement. PanchoS (talk) 10:59, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
• Category:Filipino documentary television series to Category:Philippine documentary television series – C2C per Category:Philippine television series. RioHondo (talk) 08:03, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
• Category:Lists of Filipino television series episodes to Category:Lists of Philippine television series episodes – C2C per Category:Philippine television-related lists. RioHondo (talk) 08:03, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
• Category:Filipino film and video technology to Category:Film and video technology of the Philippines – C2C per Category:Cinema of the Philippines. RioHondo (talk) 08:03, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
• Category:WikiProject GLAM/Józef Piłsudski Institute of America templates to Category:Wikipedia GLAM/Józef Piłsudski Institute of America templates – WP:C2D (underlying pages moved to Wikipedia:GLAM from WP:WikiProject GLAM).  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼  03:07, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
• Category:Wikipedia-internal navigational boxes to Category:Wikipedia-internal navigational templates – C2E (poor planning on my part; some are not in navbox form).  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼  02:28, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
• Category:Leone d'Oro winners to Category:Golden Lion winners - C2D, per Golden Lion. - RevelationDirect (talk) 21:30, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
• Category:Orders, decorations, and medals of Texas Military Forces to Category:Military awards and decorations of Texas - C2C, per Category:Military awards and decorations of the United States (There are no "orders" in the category.) - RevelationDirect (talk) 21:30, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
• Category:Education in Livingstone to Category:Education in Livingstone, Zambia – C2D: per Livingstone, Zambia Tim! (talk) 18:15, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
• Category:Education of Hanoi to Category:Education in Hanoi – C2C: convention of Category:Education by city or town Tim! (talk) 17:31, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
• Category:GMA Network Inc. to Category:GMA Network (company) – C2D per GMA Network (company). RioHondo (talk) 12:34, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Category:GMA Network people to Category:GMA Network (company) people
  • Category:GMA Network executives to Category:GMA Network (company) executives
  • Category:GMA Network Inc. subsidiaries to Category:GMA Network (company) subsidiaries
• Category:Negros Island Region to Category:Negros (Philippines) – C2D per Negros (Philippines) moved after merger of island and coterminous region. RioHondo (talk) 12:26, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Category:Ethnic groups in Negros (island) to Category:Ethnic groups in Negros (Philippines)
  • Category:Fauna of Negros (island) to Category:Fauna of Negros (Philippines)
  • Category:Flora of Negros (island) to Category:Flora of Negros (Philippines)
  • Category:People from the Negros Island Region to Category:People from Negros (Philippines)
  • Category:Volcanoes of Negros to Category:Volcanoes of Negros (Philippines)
• Category:People from Rumney to Category:People from Rumney, Cardiff – article is at Rumney, Cardiff Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 03:06, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
• Category:People from Raglan to Category:People from Raglan, Monmouthshire – article is at Raglan, Monmouthshire. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 02:47, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
• Category:People from Cardigan to Category:People from Cardigan, Ceredigion – article is at Cardigan, Ceredigion Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 02:39, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
• Category:People from Seven Sisters to Category:People from Seven Sisters, Neath Port Talbot – article is at Seven Sisters, Neath Port Talbot Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 02:37, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
• Category:People from Magor to Category:People from Magor, Monmouthshire – article is at Magor, Monmouthshire Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 02:31, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
• Category:People from Blackwood, Wales to Category:People from Blackwood, Caerphilly – article is at Blackwood, Caerphilly Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 02:30, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
• Category:Aber, Gwynedd to Category:Abergwyngregyn – C2D per Abergwyngregyn Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 02:25, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
• Category:Paisley to Category:Paisley, Renfrewshire – C2D per Paisley, Renfrewshire Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 01:32, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Category:Areas in Paisley to Category:Areas in Paisley, Renfrewshire
  • Category:Education in Paisley to Category:Education in Paisley, Renfrewshire
  • Category:People from Paisley to Category:People from Paisley, Renfrewshire
  • Category:Actors from Paisley to Category:Actors from Paisley, Renfrewshire
  • Category:Actresses from Paisley to Category:Actresses from Paisley, Renfrewshire
  • Category:Male actors from Paisley to Category:Male actors from Paisley, Renfrewshire
  • Category:Artists from Paisley to Category:Artists from Paisley, Renfrewshire
  • Category:Photographers from Paisley to Category:Photographers from Paisley, Renfrewshire
  • Category:Broadcasters from Paisley to Category:Broadcasters from Paisley, Renfrewshire
  • Category:Businesspeople from Paisley to Category:Businesspeople from Paisley, Renfrewshire
  • Category:Engineers from Paisley to Category:Engineers from Paisley, Renfrewshire
  • Category:Journalists from Paisley to Category:Journalists from Paisley, Renfrewshire
  • Category:Lawyers from Paisley to Category:Lawyers from Paisley, Renfrewshire
  • Category:Military personnel from Paisley to Category:Military personnel from Paisley, Renfrewshire
  • Category:Musicians from Paisley to Category:Musicians from Paisley, Renfrewshire
  • Category:Poets from Paisley to Category:Poets from Paisley, Renfrewshire
  • Category:Politicians from Paisley to Category:Politicians from Paisley, Renfrewshire
  • Category:Sportspeople from Paisley to Category:Sportspeople from Paisley, Renfrewshire
  • Category:Writers from Paisley to Category:Writers from Paisley, Renfrewshire
  • Category:Politics of Paisley to Category:Politics of Paisley, Renfrewshire
  • Category:Religion in Paisley to Category:Religion in Paisley, Renfrewshire
  • Category:Transport in Paisley to Category:Transport in Paisley, Renfrewshire
• Category:Fort William, Scotland to Category:Fort William, Highland – C2D per Fort William, Highland Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 01:17, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Category:People from Fort William, Scotland to Category:People from Fort William, Highland
• Category:Films set in Windsor to Category:Films set in Windsor, Berkshire – C2B per Category:Windsor, Berkshire/Windsor, Berkshire Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 01:11, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
• Category:People from Marlborough to Category:People from Marlborough, Wiltshire – C2B per Category:Marlborough, Wiltshire/Marlborough, Wiltshire. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 01:06, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
• Category:People from Manningham to Category:People from Manningham, Bradford – C2B per Category:Manningham, Bradford/Manningham, Bradford Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 01:05, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
• Category:Schools in Sale to Category:Schools in Sale, Greater Manchester – C2B per Category:Sale, Greater Manchester/Sale, Greater Manchester Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 00:59, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
• Category:UNIAN to Category:Ukrainian Independent Information Agency – C2D per Ukrainian Independent Information Agency Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 00:12, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
• Category:Ukrainian exiles of the Crimean crisis to Category:Ukrainian exiles of the annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation – C2B per Category:People of the annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation/Category:Annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation/Annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 23:56, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

Opposed nominations

• Category:Palestine Emergency to Category:Jewish insurgency in Mandatory Palestine – C2D per Jewish insurgency in Mandatory Palestine Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 09:12, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Category:British military personnel of the Palestine Emergency to Category:British military personnel of the Jewish insurgency in Mandatory Palestine
    • @Good Olfactory: I'm not sure this would be an improvement. The main article Jewish insurgency in Mandatory Palestine begins "Jewish insurgency in Mandatory Palestine involved paramilitary actions carried out by Jewish underground groups against the British forces and officials in Mandatory Palestine between 1939 and 1948." So it does not seem accurate to refer to "the Jewish insurgency" as an event; perhaps "the period of Jewish insurgency"? Meanwhile, the term "Palestine Emergency" is used elsewhere for this period, in United Kingdom casualties of war (dates stated as 1945–48) and List of friendly fire incidents#Palestine Emergency (1944-47). Perhaps the most specific term would follow the section Jewish insurgency in Mandatory Palestine#The Jewish Resistance Movement and after, 1945–47. However, "British military personnel of the Jewish Resistance Movement" or the nomination "British military personnel of the Jewish insurgency" might imply involvement in or support for the Movement/insurgency. I'd be inclined to just add dates at the end of the existing name. – Fayenatic London 15:50, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
    • Oppose these two, not uncontroversial. – Fayenatic London 23:18, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

• Category:Female geologists to Category:Women geologists – C2C: As in parent Category:Women earth scientists. fgnievinski (talk) 02:57, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Question: fgnievinski will you follow this up for all the sub-cats? – Fayenatic London 16:46, 18 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Oppose speedy as not C2C with its own sub-cats. – Fayenatic London 11:08, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

• Category:Beaches of South Goa to Category:Beaches of South Goa district – C2C per Category:South Goa district. Nocowardsoulismine (talk) 23:28, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Oppose per main article South Goa. In fact, Category:South Goa district and its subcategories should follow the main article as well. Notifying the nominator Nocowardsoulismine so they can decide how to proceed. --PanchoS (talk) 23:21, 18 June 2016 (UTC)
    • The main article should be renamed to be in line with the other articles contained in Category:Districts of India. That will also keep the South Goa categories in line with the other district-level categories contained in the above category. Most Indian districts have an eponymous city headquarters, so specifying "district" in the article/category name prevents ambiguity. For the sake of uniformity (the premise of C2C), the minority of district articles/categories with non-eponymous headquarters should follow this rule as well. Nocowardsoulismine (talk) 16:29, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

• @Nocowardsoulismine: You may point this out in a {{requested move}} on Talk:South Goa and Talk:North Goa. I'm unsure if this was a good idea though. Until then, this doesn't qualify as an speedy (=uncontroversial) rename, but may still be forwarded to a full nomination at WP:CfD, if you wish so. --PanchoS (talk) 11:04, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

• Thanks for the guidance. I've opened a move request. Nocowardsoulismine (talk) 17:58, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

• Category:Sibling to Category:Siblings - C2C and WP:PLURAL, per 5 of the 6 subcategories. - RevelationDirect (talk) 00:47, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

• Oppose – it's a topic category, as evidenced by the top level articles, and is correctly singular. Oculi (talk) 02:02, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
• Oppose: agree; the category is not exactly listing siblings. HandsomeFella (talk) 08:47, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

• Abandoned This doesn't look likely to pass a CFD so I'll abandon this here. RevelationDirect (talk) 21:33, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

• Category:Types of drinking establishment to Category:Types of drinking establishments – C2C, plural per Category:Drinking establishments. Brandmeister^talk 15:12, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Oppose, see Special:PrefixIndex/Category:Types_of and Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2011_July_6#Categories_of_types_of_things. – Fayenatic London 08:00, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

Special:PrefixIndex/Category:Types_of shows many categories with plural, like Category:Types of restaurants or Category:Types of roads. At Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2011_July_6#Categories_of_types_of_things, the consensus was to retain plural form, as could be seen. Brandmeister^talk 13:47, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

I read that CFD as no consensus either way, due to WP:ENGVAR, not a consensus to use plurals. – Fayenatic London 14:49, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

Then it's moot, without valid reason to oppose until a new consensus to consistently use either plural or singular emerges, if any. Brandmeister^talk 15:07, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

More to the point, it's moot, so it does not meet the criteria for C2C (see above). – Fayenatic London 18:18, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

Under C2C, the established naming convention for that category tree is Category:Drinking establishments, which can't use singular form, while the subcats in Category:Categories by type also use plural. Brandmeister^talk 21:01, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

Category:Drinking establishments rightly uses the plural, per WP:CATNAME, but for categories beginning "Types of", the plural is already in the word "Types". "Types of drinking establishments" might sound right to you, but it sounds wrong to others. Hence, there was no consensus at the CFD in 2014, and this is not speedy-able now. – Fayenatic London 14:10, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

• Category:Eelam Tamil martyrs to Category:Sri Lankan Tamil rebels – Duplication of Category Cossde (talk) 14:50, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
  • Oppose use of speedy procedure, as (i) no speedy criterion has been stated, (ii) this is not uncontroversial, and (iii) it is not a duplication as stated in the nomination, since it presumably contains only Sri Lankan Tamil rebels who died for the cause. – Fayenatic London 11:36, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
  • Oppose for procedural error and not every Eelam Tamil martyr is a Sri Lankan Tamil rebel. The latter is only used for members of Sri Lankan Tamil militant groups. Rajasundaram was never a member of a militant group.--obi2canibe^{talk contr} 13:31, 29 May 2016 (UTC)

• Category:Los Angeles, California to Category:Los Angeles – C2D. Regards, James (^talk/_contribs) 07:49, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

  Oppose – this has been at cfd many times, such as 2013 April 12 and consensus has not been established. Oculi (talk) 15:52, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

@James Allison: If you're scratching your head thinking, "this is about as clear of an example of C2D as I can possibly imagine", you're not alone. Oculi's background about this being controversial is quite accurate though. RevelationDirect (talk) 21:39, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

• Category:Foreign workers to Category:Foreign labor – C2C: There are no individual workers in this category. fgnievinski (talk) 23:59, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
  • Question @Fgnievinski: How does C2C apply? The current category meets the main article name. AusLondonder (talk) 05:46, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
  • Oppose Until a reply is received. AusLondonder (talk) 22:14, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

• Category:The Devil in fiction to Category:Devil in fiction – C2D and WP:THE. Brandmeister^talk 22:06, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Category:The Devil in opera to Category:Devil in opera
  • Category:The Devil in classical music to Category:Devil in classical music

• Object to CFDS speedy rename I think this should have a full discussion, especially since "devil" has many meanings, even in Christian contexts. Is this about The Devil (ie. Satan) or a devil (ie. demon)? The loss of "The" removes the capitalization and the selectiveness of the "the". In non-Abrahamic contexts, it gets worse, with some mythologies translating into different grades of Devil/devils/demons. And of course fiction already does that (just look at fantasy with Greater Devils and such) -- 70.51.45.100 (talk) 06:48, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

The common meaning is the supreme personification of evil (and/or Satan), that's why the devil redirects to devil, which is not a disambiguation page. This is also consistent with WP:COMMONNAME. Brandmeister^talk 08:17, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

Our article at devil is not about "The Devil", that article is located at Satan. If the coverage of these categories are not about the personification of evil, or the evil creatures that are servants of evil (demons), then it should not lose "The". If it is for the Abrahamic derived concept, then it should use Satan and not devil. -- 70.51.45.100 (talk) 05:57, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

• Support per nom. ☔️ Corkythehornetfan 🌺 16:31, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

* Oppose – I don't see how this can be a speedy when the article is Satan and a parent category is Category:Satan. I would not oppose changing 'The Devil' to 'Satan' which does appear speediable. Oculi (talk) 11:31, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

* Oppose It barely makes sense, 'Devil' is either 'The Devil' (Satan/Lucifer etc), 'a devil' (demon/sprite etc) or 'devils' (plural). Pincrete (talk) 23:09, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

* Remane to Satan in fiction/opera/classical music on the grounds given by Oculi above. Aristophanes68 (talk) 01:22, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

Comment, 'The Devil' appears to be more frequently used than any alternatives (Satan/Lucifer etc.) in works of fiction/music etc. I agree with those saying 'Devil' is not clear and is not a proper noun without 'The'. Therefore, also oppose change to 'Satan in etc. What is the point of using the less frequently used name in the 'works' involved? Pincrete (talk) 21:49, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

• Category:Rover engines to Category:Rover Company engines – C2B: per Rover Company/Category:Rover Company. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 22:27, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
  • Category:Rover vehicles to Category:Rover Company vehicles

Oppose both: see below comments on Jaguar Cars. We need to distinguish the brand name from the company making the cars. HandsomeFella (talk) 11:56, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

• Category:Jaguar engines to Category:Jaguar Cars engines – C2B: per Jaguar Cars/Category:Jaguar Cars. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 22:25, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
  • Category:Jaguar vehicles to Category:Jaguar Cars vehicles
  • Category:Jaguar concept vehicles to Category:Jaguar Cars concept vehicles
  • Category:Jaguar Formula One cars to Category:Jaguar Cars Formula One cars

Oppose renaming of Category:Jaguar Formula One cars to Category:Jaguar Cars Formula One cars - the Formula One team was just known as "Jaguar", so the category name should remain as is. DH85868993 (talk) 11:14, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

Oppose all: agree with DH85868993; Jaguar Cars is the name of the company, it's not the brand name (despite the article saying so), "Jaguar" is, and the model names are like "Jaguar F-Type", not "Jaguar Cars F-Type". We need to distinguish the brand name from the company making the cars. HandsomeFella (talk) 11:56, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

• Category:Piaggio aircraft to Category:Piaggio Aerospace aircraft – C2B: per Piaggio Aerospace/Category:Piaggio Aerospace. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 22:19, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
  • Category:Piaggio aircraft engines to Category:Piaggio Aerospace aircraft engines

Oppose both: see above comments on Jaguar Cars. We need to distinguish the brand name from the company making the aircraft. HandsomeFella (talk) 15:41, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

Oppose both: Per WP:C2C (long-established tree naming convention}. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 09:05, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

• Category:Bertone vehicles to Category:Gruppo Bertone vehicles – C2B: per Gruppo Bertone/Category:Gruppo Bertone. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 22:12, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
  • Category:Bertone concept vehicles to Category:Gruppo Bertone concept vehicles

Oppose both: see above comments on Jaguar Cars. We need to distinguish the brand name from the company making the cars. HandsomeFella (talk) 12:00, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

Would Support in CFD Some of the other renames here I would oppose because the name is both a specific brand and a company that houses other brands in the parent category. That's not the case here though. RevelationDirect (talk) 09:16, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

• Category:Bandini vehicles to Category:Bandini Automobili vehicles – C2B: per Bandini Automobili/Category:Bandini Automobili. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 22:10, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

Oppose: see above comments on Jaguar Cars. We need to distinguish the brand name from the company making the cars. HandsomeFella (talk) 12:00, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

Concur with all oppose on this set of renames; this is a semantic confusion of the company and the product line's brand name. It's the same as trying to rename all "Windows" categories to use "Microsoft" instead of "Windows".  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼  21:35, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

Would Support in CFD Some of the other renames here I would oppose because the name is both a specific brand and a company that houses other brands in the parent category. That's not the case here though. RevelationDirect (talk) 09:16, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

• Category:Branches of thermodynamics to Category:Subfields of thermodynamics – C2C: As in rest of Category:Subfields by academic discipline. fgnievinski (talk) 02:49, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
• Category:Fields of seismology to Category:Subfields of seismology – C2C: As in rest of Category:Subfields by academic discipline. fgnievinski (talk) 02:48, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
• Category:Branches of psychology to Category:Subfields of psychology – C2C: As in rest of Category:Subfields by academic discipline. fgnievinski (talk) 02:48, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
• Category:Branches of philosophy to Category:Subfields of philosophy – C2C: As in rest of Category:Subfields by academic discipline. fgnievinski (talk) 02:46, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
• Category:Branches of meteorology to Category:Subfields of meteorology – C2C: As in rest of Category:Subfields by academic discipline. fgnievinski (talk) 02:45, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

  Anybody is reviewing this renaming proposition? I am neutral on the matter but this has been proposed for far too long. It should be resolved. Pierre cb (talk) 03:17, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

  I think the discussion is happening further down the page, under "Archaeological subdivisions". Aristophanes68 (talk) 04:06, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

• Category:Fields of mathematics to Category:Subfields of mathematics – C2C: As in rest of Category:Subfields by academic discipline. fgnievinski (talk) 02:45, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
• Category:Linguistics disciplines to Category:Subfields of linguistics – C2C: As in rest of Category:Subfields by academic discipline. fgnievinski (talk) 02:45, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
• Category:Branches of immunology to Category:Subfields of immunology – C2C: As in rest of Category:Subfields by academic discipline. fgnievinski (talk) 02:44, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
• Category:Fields of history to Category:Subfields of history – C2C: As in rest of Category:Subfields by academic discipline. fgnievinski (talk) 02:44, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
• Category:Branches of geography to Category:Subfields of geography – C2C: As in rest of Category:Subfields by academic discipline. fgnievinski (talk) 02:44, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
• Category:Forensic disciplines to Category:Subfields of forensics – C2A: As in rest of Category:Subfields by academic discipline. fgnievinski (talk) 02:44, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
• Category:Fields of finance to Category:Subfields of finance – C2C: As in rest of Category:Subfields by academic discipline. fgnievinski (talk) 02:43, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
• Category:Economics by specialty to Category:Subfields of economy – C2C: As in rest of Category:Subfields by academic discipline. fgnievinski (talk) 02:43, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
• Category:Areas of computer science to Category:Subfields of computer science – C2C: As in rest of Category:Subfields by academic discipline. fgnievinski (talk) 02:43, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
• Category:Branches of botany to Category:Subfields of botany – C2C: As in rest of Category:Subfields by academic discipline. fgnievinski (talk) 02:43, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
• Category:Branches of biology to Category:Subfields of biology – C2C: As in rest of Category:Subfields by academic discipline. fgnievinski (talk) 02:42, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
• Category:Astronomical sub-disciplines to Category:Subfields of astronomy – C2A: As in rest of Category:Subfields by academic discipline. fgnievinski (talk) 02:42, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
• Category:Archaeological sub-disciplines to Category:Subfields of archaeology – C2C: As in rest of Category:Subfields by academic discipline. fgnievinski (talk) 02:41, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

  Oppose speedy There is no clear convention for the proposed format in Category:Subfields by academic discipline, and therefore C2C doesn't apply. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 18:44, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

  Of course there is: the convention of of the parent category, which features the keyword "Subfields", not any of "sub-disciplines", "disciplines", "branches", "fields", or "areas". fgnievinski (talk) 01:16, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

  Clear convention means almost every category in uses the proposed format in the tree. Currently, however, only 8 of the 32 subcategories of Category:Subfields by academic discipline uses the "Subfields of FOO" format, so it's not a clear convention. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 13:37, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

  Support it's simply citing the wrong criterion; we normalize subcat names to parentcat names absent an unusual reason not to. No prejudice against a later and larger CfR on the whole tree to use one convention consistently. This one should be done per WP:COMMONSENSE anyway, since "branches" is a vernacularism; people actually in academic disciplines/fields don't call them "branches" (or "areas" for that matter; "areas" means topical scopes of focus/specialization by individuals or groups, and "branches" doesn't really mean anything).  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼  21:35, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

Support with SMcCandlish.

Oppose speedy, CFR instead Start a proper CFR and link it to science projects. What is needed here is the participation of as many people from many different disciplines/fields as possible. CN1 (talk) 13:58, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

• Oppose Many of these have pages associated with them, often of the same name (e.g. Branches of botany, Archaeological sub-disciplines, Branches of science), which seem to indicate that "subfield" is not the accepted standard (as a historian it is not, for what it is worth, the term that I would reach for to describe my own research area). More importantly, these pages indicate that a decision made here will have impacts beyond categorisation - so discussion should take place in a venue where input from a wide variety of wiki-bureaucrats, not just those of the categorisation sub-field, have a reasonable chance of participating. Also, it would be a great shame to lose "branches of botany." Furius (talk) 00:42, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

  Oppose. Fields of mathematics is bad enough but subfields is worse — both field and subfield are technical terms in mathematics with specific meanings that are unrelated to research categorization. The old name Category:Subdivisions of mathematics (replaced in 2011) was much better. This is the sort of problem created by trying to fit all of these different subjects into a single restrictive naming scheme. I imagine the same issue will come up in other subjects as well; anyway my position is that, for consistency, we should agree to remain inconsistent. —David Eppstein (talk) 00:34, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

On hold pending other discussion

• Category:Royal Bank of Scotland people to Category:The Royal Bank of Scotland people C2D: per The Royal Bank of Scotland. Tim! (talk) 18:44, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
• Category:Royal Bank of Scotland Group to Category:The Royal Bank of Scotland Group – C2D: per The Royal Bank of Scotland Group Tim! (talk) 18:39, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Category:Chairmen of Royal Bank of Scotland Group to Category:Chairmen of The Royal Bank of Scotland Group 
  • Category:Royal Bank of Scotland Group litigation to Category:The Royal Bank of Scotland Group litigation
    • I have started an RM to remove "the" from the article names, see Talk:The_Royal_Bank_of_Scotland#Requested_move_28_June_2016. – Fayenatic London 10:48, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

• Category:Historians from the Republic of Venice to Category:Republic of Venice historians – C2C in Category:Republic of Venice people. Although the revised name could be taken as ambiguous, it follows the others in Category:Historians by nationality. – Fayenatic London 07:03, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Category:Explorers from the Republic of Venice to Category:Republic of Venice explorers
    • Oppose, because of the ambiguity already discussed at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2015 November 14. Sionk (talk) 17:51, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
      • Ah, well spotted. Wouldn't the same arguments apply to all of Category:Historians by nationality and Category:Explorers by nationality? Mass nomination, anyone? – Fayenatic London 17:36, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
        • @Fayenatic london: Good point. I agree the same arguments would apply to all of these, and am preparing a mass nomination for the smaller one, Category:Explorers by nationality. Cheers, PanchoS (talk) 23:25, 18 June 2016 (UTC)
          • I can't really see how the same argument applies generally to Category: Italian explorers, Category: French historians etc. The earlier debate arose because there is no descriptive adjective for people from the Republic of Venice. Sionk (talk) 12:24, 19 June 2016 (UTC)
            • Maybe it's unnecessary in Europe, but the category names in Europe should follow those required for places that were explored (OK, by Europeans, we know...)
            • Anyway, this speedy nomination for Explorers will not be C2C if the rest are renamed the other way at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2016_June_18#Category:Explorers_by_nationality. Historians should probably follow. – Fayenatic London 12:36, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

Moved to full discussion

• Category:Lithuanian courts to Category:Courts in Lithuania – C2C: per Category:Courts by country Tim! (talk) 19:17, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Category:Christmas Island courts to Category:Courts in Christmas Island
  • Category:Cocos (Keeling) Islands courts to Category:Courts in the Cocos (Keeling) Islands
  • Category:Courts of Northern Ireland to Category:Courts in Northern Ireland
  • Category:Courts of the Republic of Ireland to Category:Courts in the Republic of Ireland
  • Category:Courts of Ireland to Category:Courts in Ireland 
  • Category:Greek courts to Category:Courts in Greece 
  • Category:Australian courts to Category:Courts in Australia – C2C. Tim! (talk) 19:18, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
    • @Tim!: are these right, though? Some of these are contrary to C2D. Most of the pages beginning Special:PrefixIndex/Courts_in are redirects; there are more beginning Special:PrefixIndex/Courts_of. – Fayenatic London 17:13, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
      • @Fayenatic london: moved to a full discussion at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2016_June_20#Category:Courts_by_country. Tim! (talk) 18:30, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

• Category:Northern Irish Queen's Counsel to Category:Queen's Counsel from Northern Ireland – C2C: per convention of Category:People from Northern Ireland. Please retain the old title as a {{category redirect}} BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 20:24, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Oppose. I think the more relevant convention is that of Category:Queen's Counsel which use the current style. Number 57 20:54, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
    • @Number 57: the demonym-phrase overrules the occupational category convention, see Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2009_January_7#Category:Northern_Irish_people and Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2009_July_13. – Fayenatic London 20:28, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
      • @Fayenatic london: I can't really respond in detail right now as don't have laptop access, but in summary I believe the idea that we shouldn't use the phrase Northern Irish is a fringe POV pushed by some Irish nationalists that should not have gained any credence on Wikipedia. Both of the discussions you linked to were proposals from the notorious editor Vintagekits, who was indef blocked years ago due to his unacceptable behaviour (and just to clarify, I am not putting BHG in the same category as Vintagekits et al.). Number 57 23:18, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
        • @Number 57: well, here's an interesting situation. IMHO C2C still permits speedy renaming, because there is a convention that is well defined and overwhelmingly used within the hierarchy. Only C2D mentions "uncontroversial"; C2C doesn't. But if you still object and would prefer a full CfD, then let's go that way. – Fayenatic London 15:07, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
          • Yes please (whilst I appreciate there is a naming convention on the Northern Ireland side, there is also one on the Queen's Counsel side, and I think it might be worth raising the Northern Irish issue again for a more reasoned discussion now that some of the more combative editors in that field are no longer with us). And I'm not sure what you're saying – even if there are objections, the category should still be moved if it's clear there is a well-defined convention? That's not my experience (I recall a couple of C2C nominations I made here that were objected to despite conventions being in place). Cheers, Number 57 21:41, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

            • Yes, I'm saying that the wording above allows a well-defined convention to be applied speedily even if there are objections. Perhaps the others that you referred to were not processed speedily because there was some ambiguity. In this case, although there is a clash of two conventions, it is clear which one should override the other. However, I'm not going to push it. – Fayenatic London 06:57, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

            • A good compromise which I would favour that I wish would get more attention would be "Northern Ireland FOOs". Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 00:07, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
              • Good Olfactory's proposal seems to be the best solution for the whole category tree, but in that case we'd need to rediscuss Category:Northern Irish people. Should we do so? Absolutely. But is there someone willing to prepare a nomination? --PanchoS (talk) 09:46, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
                • Sigh.
                  1. Number 57's comments about the January 2009 CFR which created this convention are disappointing. At least 13 editors !voted in that discussion, and its outcome (by a clear margin) has been stable for 7 years .. so whatever anyone's view of the rest of the activities of the long-since-banned Vintagekits, his proposal in this case has been shown to have a durable consensus.
                     Similarly, the July 2009 CFR was approved with zero opposes. I find it rather sad to see the concerns of Irish editors being dismissed as "fringe" ... and BTW, AFAICS, only 1 out of 6 editors in the July 2009 discussion was Irish.
                  2. If Number 57 objects to the convention applied to dozens of categories, then the way to raise that issue is to open a group CFR to rename all the effected categories, rather than to obstruct the harmomisation of a lone outlier. If and when the convention is changed, then this category can be changed along with it ... but until then, the objection serves no useful purpose. It just maintains an outlier, whose non-std format impedes categorisation.
                  3. Same for Good Olfactory's proposal for a "Northern Ireland fooers" format. . Whatever the merits of that idea (I'm not persuaded so far), it would need a group CFR. This isn't the place to pursue it.
                  4. In the meantime, please can this speedy just proceed? It won't prejudice any future proposal to change the convention, so I can see no gain to anyone from leaving this outlier uncorrected. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 21:22, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
                  • My comment was just me floating a general idea. I think that's an OK thing to do in almost any context—it's not advocating for a particular change in this particular proposal, but it's giving users something to think about when the overall context is considered. I think that this particular change that was proposed should have been done speedily. But as you know @BrownHairedGirl: I've thought this about a number of other instances as well, and the approach has always seemed to be that any opposition is sufficient to move the issue to a full discussion. I still generally do not agree with this approach when we encounter nominations and opposition as in this case. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 06:53, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
                    • GO, I support the principle that a sustained objection should stop a speedy. The point of speedies is that they are for uncontroversial actions, so if an objection is sustained, they don't qualify. I hoped that in this case Number 57 might withdraw their objection, but the move to full CFD has made that moot.
                      As to floating the idea, that's fine. I was just trying to discuss use of theis venue for extended discussion on it. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 09:46, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Moved to CFD here. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:40, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

• Category:Monuments historiques of Centre-Val de Loire to Category:Historic monuments of Centre-Val de Loire – Changing name combining English and French terms to all English; monument historique = historic monument. See Category_talk:Monuments_historiques_of_Centre-Val_de_Loire. Hoping I'm within the speedy criteria to propose this under C2A above. Eric ^talk 16:20, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
• Category:Monuments historiques of Indre-et-Loire to Category:Historic monuments of Indre-et-Loire – Changing name combining English and French terms to all English; monument historique = historic monument. Would I be stretching the speedy criteria to propose this under C2A above? Eric ^talk 15:58, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
  • Oppose use of speedy of the two immediately above. We probably should have a full discussion on this, since "Monument historique" is an official designation and we have an article about it that uses the French-language name. We have a general parent category Category:Official historical monuments of France, but then a bunch of the by-location subcategories use "Monuments historiques", so I think a full discussion is needed to sort this all out. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 01:45, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
  • Question: Hi @Good Olfactory:, thanks for weighing in. Can we simply move this to the full discussion, or do we wait for more input? Also, seeing your mention of the parent cat, I might have done better to propose this under C2C. Eric ^talk 13:54, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
    • @Eric: hi; you don't have to wait for any more input on this page—you're free to start a full discussion at any time. A full CFD is kind of the "default" procedure, so if in doubt, starting a full discussion is never wrong. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 23:05, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
    • Ok, thanks. Added proposal here. Eric ^talk 14:04, 6 May 2016 (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.