Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Speedy: Difference between revisions
→Moved to full discussion: rm category, Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2017 January 19#Category:Persecution by atheists was closed as no consensus |
Necrothesp (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 66: | Line 66: | ||
<!-- PLEASE DON'T CHANGE THE FOLLOWING LINE, AS IT BREAKS TWINKLE'S CFDS MODULE --> |
<!-- PLEASE DON'T CHANGE THE FOLLOWING LINE, AS IT BREAKS TWINKLE'S CFDS MODULE --> |
||
<!-- PLACE NEW NOMINATIONS AT THE TOP OF THIS LIST, BELOW THIS LINE --> |
<!-- PLACE NEW NOMINATIONS AT THE TOP OF THIS LIST, BELOW THIS LINE --> |
||
* [[:Category:Women generals]] to [[:Category:Female generals]] – C2C. Every other subcat of [[:Category:Female generals and flag officers]] uses "Female" instead of "Women". -- [[User:Necrothesp|Necrothesp]] ([[User talk:Necrothesp|talk]]) 15:37, 14 February 2017 (UTC) |
|||
* [[:Category:Burial sites of the Rurik Dynasty]] to [[:Category:Burial sites of the Rurik dynasty]] – C2A/C2D per [[Rurik dynasty]]. [[User:Armbrust|Armbrust]] <sup>[[User talk:Armbrust|<font color="#E3A857">The</font> <font color="#008000">Homunculus</font>]]</sup> 07:19, 14 February 2017 (UTC) |
* [[:Category:Burial sites of the Rurik Dynasty]] to [[:Category:Burial sites of the Rurik dynasty]] – C2A/C2D per [[Rurik dynasty]]. [[User:Armbrust|Armbrust]] <sup>[[User talk:Armbrust|<font color="#E3A857">The</font> <font color="#008000">Homunculus</font>]]</sup> 07:19, 14 February 2017 (UTC) |
||
* [[:Category:Rugby union in American dependencies]] to [[:Category:Rugby union in insular areas of the United States]] – C2C: per parent tree [[:Category:Sports in insular areas of the United States by sport]]→[[:Category:Sports in insular areas of the United States]]→[[:Category:Insular areas of the United States]]. --[[User:BrownHairedGirl|<span style="color:#663200;">Brown</span>HairedGirl]] <small>[[User talk:BrownHairedGirl|(talk)]] • ([[Special:Contributions/BrownHairedGirl|contribs]])</small> 17:17, 13 February 2017 (UTC) |
* [[:Category:Rugby union in American dependencies]] to [[:Category:Rugby union in insular areas of the United States]] – C2C: per parent tree [[:Category:Sports in insular areas of the United States by sport]]→[[:Category:Sports in insular areas of the United States]]→[[:Category:Insular areas of the United States]]. --[[User:BrownHairedGirl|<span style="color:#663200;">Brown</span>HairedGirl]] <small>[[User talk:BrownHairedGirl|(talk)]] • ([[Special:Contributions/BrownHairedGirl|contribs]])</small> 17:17, 13 February 2017 (UTC) |
Revision as of 15:38, 14 February 2017
Deletion discussions |
---|
|
Articles |
Templates and modules |
Files |
Categories |
Redirects |
Miscellany |
Speedy deletion |
Proposed deletion |
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 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 renaming, or merging are strictly limited to:
C2A: Typographic and spelling fixes
- Correction of spelling errors and capitalization fixes. Differences between British and American spelling (e.g. Harbours → Harbors) are not considered errors; however if the convention of the relevant category tree is to use one form over the other then a rename may be appropriate under C2C. If both spellings exist as otherwise-identical category names, they should be merged.
- Appropriate conversion of hyphens into en dashes or vice versa (e.g. Category:Canada-Russia relations → Category:Canada–Russia relations).
C2B: Enforcing established Wikipedia naming conventions and practices
- Expanding abbreviated country names (e.g. U.S. → United States).
- Disambiguation fixes from an unqualified name (e.g. Category:Washington → Category:Washington (state) or Category:Washington, D.C.).
C2C: Bringing a category into line with established naming conventions for that category tree, or into line with the various "x by y", "x of y", or "x in y" categorization conventions specified at Wikipedia:Category names
- This should be used only where there is no room for doubt that the category in question is being used for the standard purpose instead of being a potential subcategory.
- This criterion should be applied only when there is no ambiguity or doubt over the existence of a category naming convention. Such a convention must be well defined and must be overwhelmingly used within the tree. If this is not the case then the category in question must be brought forward to a full Cfd nomination.
- This criterion will not apply in cases where the category tree observes distinctions in local usage (e.g. Category:Transportation in the United States and Category:Transport in the United Kingdom).
C2D: Facilitating concordance between a particular category's name and a related page's name
- Renaming a topic category to match its eponymous page (e.g. Category:The Beatles and The Beatles).
- This applies only if the related page's current name (and by extension, the proposed name for the category) is unambiguous, and uncontroversial – either because of longstanding stability at that particular name or because the page was just moved after explicit consensus to rename was reached at a page move discussion. If the page names are controversial or ambiguous in any way, then this criterion does not apply.
- This criterion also does not apply if there is any ongoing discussion about the name of the page or category, or if there has been a recent discussion concerning any of the pages that resulted in a no consensus result.
C2E: Author request
- This criterion applies only if the author of a category requests or agrees to renaming within six months of creating the category.
- The criterion does not apply if other editors have populated or changed the category since it was created. "Other editors" includes bots that populated the category, but excludes an editor working with the author on the renaming.
- 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]] to [[:Category:new name]] – Reason ~~~~
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 07:17, 29 July 2024 (UTC). Currently, there are 167 open requests (. )
Do not use the "Move" tab to move categories listed here! Categories are processed following the 48-hour discussion period and are moved by a bot. |
Current nominations
- Category:Women generals to Category:Female generals – C2C. Every other subcat of Category:Female generals and flag officers uses "Female" instead of "Women". -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:37, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
- Category:Burial sites of the Rurik Dynasty to Category:Burial sites of the Rurik dynasty – C2A/C2D per Rurik dynasty. Armbrust The Homunculus 07:19, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
- Category:Rugby union in American dependencies to Category:Rugby union in insular areas of the United States – C2C: per parent tree Category:Sports in insular areas of the United States by sport→Category:Sports in insular areas of the United States→Category:Insular areas of the United States. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 17:17, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
- Category:Sport by non-sovereign territory and sport to Category:Sport by dependent territory and sport – C2C: per parent Category:Sport by dependent territory. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 13:14, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
- Category:Football competitions in overseas departments and territories of France to Category:Football competitions in Overseas France – C2C: per Category:Overseas France. Also C2D per Overseas France. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 12:47, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
- Category:Courts in Scotland to Category:Court buildings in Scotland – C2C following Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2017_January_22#Courts_in_the_United_Kingdom. – Fayenatic London 23:10, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
- Category:Rebellions in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth to Category:Rebellions in the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth – C2C per Category:Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth, mind the dash. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:44, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
- Category:Geography of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth to Category:Geography of the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth
- Category:History books about the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth to Category:History books about the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth
- Category:Subdivisions of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth to Category:Subdivisions of the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth
- Category:Early modern history of Ukraine to Category:Early Modern history of Ukraine – C2C, Category:Early Modern history by country. In the tree there is no clear standard regarding the insertion of "history of" but there is almost uniformity regarding the capitalization of "Modern". Marcocapelle (talk) 15:17, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
- Category:Palestian National Authority templates - C2E. Misspelling of already existing Category:Palestinian National Authority templates.GreyShark (dibra) 12:00, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
- Category:X (game series) to Category:X (video game series) – C2D. Izno (talk) 00:56, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
- Category:Rurik Dynasty to Category:Rurik dynasty – C2D, Rurik dynasty. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:33, 11 February 2017 (UTC)
- Category:9th-century Ukrainian princes to Category:9th-century princes in Rus' – C2C, Category:Princes in Rus', avoids anachronism. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:07, 11 February 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose speedy Subcategory of Category:9th-century Ukrainian people. Armbrust The Homunculus 07:17, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
- Category:Old Russian inscriptions to Category:Old East Slavic inscriptions – C2D, Old Russian redirects to Old East Slavic. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:29, 11 February 2017 (UTC)
- Category:Ziemias of Poland to Category:Ziemias – C2E ("of Poland" is redundant, there aren't any other ziemias than Polish ziemias). Marcocapelle (talk) 09:12, 11 February 2017 (UTC)
Opposed nominations
- Category:Educational organisations based in Saudi Arabia to Category:Educational organisations in Saudi Arabia – C2C. Rathfelder (talk) 22:54, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
- Category:Educational organisations based in the United Kingdom to Category:Educational organisations in the United Kingdom
- Category:Educational organisations based in Northern Ireland to Category:Educational organisations in Northern Ireland
- Category:Educational organisations based in New Zealand to Category:Educational organisations in New Zealand
- Category:Educational organisations based in London to Category:Educational organisations in London
- Category:Educational organisations based in Egypt to Category:Educational organisations in Egypt
- Category:Educational organizations based in the United States to Category:Educational organizations in the United States
- Category:Educational organizations based in the Czech Republic to Category:Educational organizations in the Czech Republic
- Category:Educational organizations based in Taiwan to Category:Educational organizations in Taiwan
- Category:Educational organizations based in Punjab to Category:Educational organisations in Punjab
- Category:Educational organizations based in Nigeria to Category:Educational organizations in Nigeria
- Category:Educational organizations based in Israel to Category:Educational organizations in Israel – C2C. Rathfelder (talk) 22:39, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose – C2C supports 'based in' per Category:Organizations by country (a format decided by cfd in 2006). Oculi (talk) 00:33, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
- It was probably meant as C2C per the convention in Category:Educational organizations by country. Armbrust The Homunculus 08:00, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
- There are a much larger number of categories of the form "Educational institutions in Foo", "Educational institutions established ..." etc. I have no strong view either way, but I think there should be consistency.Rathfelder (talk) 16:21, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose – C2C supports 'based in' per Category:Organizations by country (a format decided by cfd in 2006). Oculi (talk) 00:33, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
- @Rathfelder: do you want to take these to full CFD? Otherwise they should be de-listed as stale. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 06:26, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
- Yes. Can I do that myself? Rathfelder (talk) 11:27, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
- Yes you can. Marcocapelle (talk) 22:16, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
On hold pending other discussion
- None currently
Moved to full discussion
- Category:Hotels on the National Register of Historic Places in Kentucky to Category:Hotel buildings on the National Register of Historic Places in Kentucky – C2C. Rathfelder (talk) 23:27, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose. See comment on Hawaii. Nyttend (talk) 03:52, 8 February 2017 (UTC)
- Category:Hotels on the National Register of Historic Places in Hawaii to Category:Hotel buildings on the National Register of Historic Places in Hawaii – C2C. Rathfelder (talk) 23:26, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose. The parent tree is Category:Hotels and its child categories Category:Hotels in the United States and Category:Historic hotels in the United States. I'm not seeing any "Hotel buildings" categories except for the NR tree (Category:Hotel buildings, Category:Hotel buildings in the United States, and Category:Historic hotel buildings in the United States are all nonexistent), so it's the "Hotel buildings on the NR" tree that needs to be C2C renamed. Nyttend (talk) 03:52, 8 February 2017 (UTC)
- A lot (most?) of the NRHP listings on the mainland are former small inns that are no longer active hotels so that may be where the "buildings" naming came from. RevelationDirect (talk) 03:43, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
- Moved to full discussion at WP:Categories for discussion/Log/2017 February 11#Hotel_buildings_on_the_NRHP. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 18:09, 11 February 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose. The parent tree is Category:Hotels and its child categories Category:Hotels in the United States and Category:Historic hotels in the United States. I'm not seeing any "Hotel buildings" categories except for the NR tree (Category:Hotel buildings, Category:Hotel buildings in the United States, and Category:Historic hotel buildings in the United States are all nonexistent), so it's the "Hotel buildings on the NR" tree that needs to be C2C renamed. Nyttend (talk) 03:52, 8 February 2017 (UTC)
- Category:Sports organizations of Austria to Category:Sports organisations of Austria – C2C: per Category:Organisations based in Austria Tim! (talk) 13:38, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose. @Tim!: Austria does has not have predominant WP:TIES to British English, so no reason to impose British spelling. I will create a {{Category redirect}} ... and you may want to comment on my request to run a bot to create such redirects for all organi[sz]ation categories. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 18:05, 8 February 2017 (UTC)
- Category:Barcelona Sporting Club to Category:Barcelona S.C. – C2D per Barcelona S.C.. Tassedethe (talk) 18:29, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
- Category:Barcelona Sporting Club managers to Category:Barcelona S.C. managers
- Category:Barcelona Sporting Club matches to Category:Barcelona S.C. matches
- Category:Barcelona Sporting Club footballers to Category:Barcelona S.C. footballers
- Category:Barcelona Sporting Club seasons to Category:Barcelona S.C. seasons
- Oppose @Tassedethe the head article was bold-moved[1] only 4 months ago, apparently without discussion. That fails the C2D requirement for "longstanding stability", so it needs a full CFD. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 16:05, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
- Category:Members of constitutional conventions to Category:Members of constitutional conventions (political meeting) – C2B: per Constitutional convention (political meeting)/Category:Constitutional conventions (political meeting). Armbrust The Homunculus 21:26, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
- Why the caps? Pppery 00:42, 3 January 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose. Sorry Armbrust, but while this does clearly fits C2B, it's also horribly ugly. I also doubt that it is really necessary. Nobody can be a member of a Constitutional convention (political custom), so the current title is unambiguous. I don't think we need let the guideline force us into such superfluous verbosity. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 19:41, 3 January 2017 (UTC)
- Category:Hisar, India to Category:Hisar (city) – C2D: per Hisar (city). Armbrust The Homunculus 15:10, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
- Category:Buildings and structures in Hisar, India to Category:Buildings and structures in Hisar (city)
- Category:Hospitals in Hisar to Category:Hospitals in Hisar (city)
- Category:Education in Hisar, India to Category:Education in Hisar (city)
- Category:Schools in Hisar, India to Category:Schools in Hisar (city)
- Category:Universities and colleges in Hisar, India to Category:Universities and colleges in Hisar (city)
- Category:Neighbourhoods in Hisar, India to Category:Neighbourhoods in Hisar (city)
- Category:Organisations based in Hisar, India to Category:Organisations based in Hisar (city)
- Category:People from Hisar, India to Category:People from Hisar (city)
- Category:Tourism in Hisar, India to Category:Tourism in Hisar (city)
- Category:Archaeological sites in Hisar, India to Category:Archaeological sites in Hisar (city)
- Per below, WP:PLACEDAB prefers countries to generic words as disambiguators, so if anything the article should be renamed in line with the category hierarchy.Le Deluge (talk) 13:57, 20 December 2016 (UTC) Update - it looks like the article was moved without discussion from Hisar, India in October 2015 in an attempt to distinguish from Hisar District, but in general Indian cities/districts seem to fit the old format.Le Deluge (talk) 14:04, 20 December 2016 (UTC)
- Category:People from the Principality of Serbia to Category:People of the Principality of Serbia – C2C (see Category:People by former country). These are not hometowns, but historical countries. The categories includes citizens and residents (of, in) and not strictly emigrants (from).--Zoupan 04:16, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
- Category:People from the Almohad Caliphate to Category:People of the Almohad Caliphate
- Category:People from the Cretan State to Category:People of the Cretan State
- Category:People from the Republic of Ragusa to Category:People of the Republic of Ragusa
- Category:People from the Kingdom of Sardinia to Category:People of the Kingdom of Sardinia
- Category:People from the Principality of Serbia to Category:People of the Principality of Serbia
- Category:People from the Kingdom of Serbia to Category:People of the Kingdom of Serbia
- Oppose speedy There is no clear convention in Category:People by former country for the proposed format. 72 of its subcategories use the "FOOian people" format. Armbrust The Homunculus 11:41, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
- There is indeed a clear convention for the proposed format of these listed categories, in "People of the X". As explained, these are not hometowns, but historical countries. The categories includes citizens and residents (of, in) and not strictly emigrants (from). We are not talking about "FOOian people" here, that is another discussion. Why have three different styles, instead of two?--Zoupan 20:03, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
- Currently 72 subcategories use the "FOOian people" format, and 85 use the proposed "People of FOO". That's, IMO, not a clear convention. Armbrust The Homunculus 22:46, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
- @Zoupan: In the whole tree of Category:People by place, "from" is not at all limited to immigration, in fact "from" is used as a synonym of "of" or "in". Marcocapelle (talk) 09:16, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
- But here we are talking about people by former country, right? Why should there be two different styles of "People x"?--Zoupan 19:03, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
- In this context "former country" is a no longer existing country, so it has nothing to do with migration. I agree there shouldn't be two different styles throughout the tree of Category:People by place. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:21, 29 January 2017 (UTC)
- I was only explaining the implications of, let's say, People from New York versus People of the Province of New York. Again, should the former country categories beginning with "People..." be divided/grouped into "People of" (the majority) and/or "People from" (minority)? Help me understand why the rename of tagged categories would be a problem.--Zoupan 05:34, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
- In this context "former country" is a no longer existing country, so it has nothing to do with migration. I agree there shouldn't be two different styles throughout the tree of Category:People by place. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:21, 29 January 2017 (UTC)
- But here we are talking about people by former country, right? Why should there be two different styles of "People x"?--Zoupan 19:03, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
- @Zoupan: In the whole tree of Category:People by place, "from" is not at all limited to immigration, in fact "from" is used as a synonym of "of" or "in". Marcocapelle (talk) 09:16, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
- Currently 72 subcategories use the "FOOian people" format, and 85 use the proposed "People of FOO". That's, IMO, not a clear convention. Armbrust The Homunculus 22:46, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
- There is indeed a clear convention for the proposed format of these listed categories, in "People of the X". As explained, these are not hometowns, but historical countries. The categories includes citizens and residents (of, in) and not strictly emigrants (from). We are not talking about "FOOian people" here, that is another discussion. Why have three different styles, instead of two?--Zoupan 20:03, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
- @Zoupan: since this nomination has been opposed, it needs to be taken to a full discussion or withdrawn. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 19:36, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
- Then this needs a full discussion.--Zoupan 19:54, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
- @Zoupan: so feel free to start one at WP:CFD. No invitatation needed :) --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 20:11, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
- Then this needs a full discussion.--Zoupan 19:54, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose speedy There is no clear convention in Category:People by former country for the proposed format. 72 of its subcategories use the "FOOian people" format. Armbrust The Homunculus 11:41, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
- Category:Thai Premier League seasons to Category:Thai League seasons – C2B: per Thai League. Armbrust The Homunculus 21:20, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
- Category:Thai Premier League players to Category:Thai League players
- Category:Thai Premier League managers to Category:Thai League managers
- Oppose. Sorry Armbrust, but "Thai League" is ambiguous. The head article Thai League is indeed about football, but the Thai volleyball leagues are also known as "Thai League". See e.g. 2016–17 Women's Volleyball Thailand League. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 17:43, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
- Nice time timing, would been better before Category:Thai League was renamed (nominated by someone else. Armbrust The Homunculus 18:45, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
- It seems to have been speedied, but I missed it :(
I will full-CFD the lot. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 23:20, 20 January 2017 (UTC)- See full discussion at WP:CFD 2017 February 7, to revert the other moves. @Armbrust: note that after further burrowing, I found that the whole things arises from some editor(s) ignoring an RM outcome and proceeding with a cut-and-paste move. In future, please could you check the history and talk pages of head articles before proposing C2D moves? --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 02:32, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
- It seems to have been speedied, but I missed it :(
- Nice time timing, would been better before Category:Thai League was renamed (nominated by someone else. Armbrust The Homunculus 18:45, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose. Sorry Armbrust, but "Thai League" is ambiguous. The head article Thai League is indeed about football, but the Thai volleyball leagues are also known as "Thai League". See e.g. 2016–17 Women's Volleyball Thailand League. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 17:43, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
- Category:Male wheelchair basketball players to Category:Men's wheelchair basketball players – C2C: per parent Category:Men's basketball players BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 03:15, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose These are not the same things at all! Nearly all will play mixed basketball as well. Hawkeye7 (talk) 04:22, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
- AS discussed at User talk:BrownHairedGirl#Women.27s_wheelchair_basketball_players.29, that is not a reason to break the naming convention. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 04:41, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
- Moved to full discussion at at WP:CFD 2017 February 7. -BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 01:10, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose These are not the same things at all! Nearly all will play mixed basketball as well. Hawkeye7 (talk) 04:22, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
- Category:Roman Catholic organizations by century of establishment to Category:Catholic organizations by century of establishment – C2D per Category:Catholic organizations, Category:Catholic Church and article Catholic Church. I realize there is still more to be renamed than the below but let's just give it a start. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:18, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
- Category:Roman Catholic congregations by century of establishment to Category:Catholic congregations by century of establishment
- Category:Roman Catholic dioceses by century of establishment to Category:Catholic dioceses by century of establishment
- Category:Roman Catholic institutes by century of establishment to Category:Catholic institutes by century of establishment
- Category:Roman Catholic orders by century of establishment to Category:Catholic orders by century of establishment
- Category:Roman Catholic organizations established in the 16th century to Category:Catholic organizations established in the 16th century
- Category:Roman Catholic organizations established in the 17th century to Category:Catholic organizations established in the 17th century
- Category:Roman Catholic organizations established in the 18th century to Category:Catholic organizations established in the 18th century
- Category:Roman Catholic organizations established in the 19th century to Category:Catholic organizations established in the 19th century
- Category:Roman Catholic organizations established in the 20th century to Category:Catholic organizations established in the 20th century
- Category:Roman Catholic organizations established in the 21st century to Category:Catholic organizations established in the 21st century
- Oppose, because this creates ambiguity. The Oct 2016 CFD was flawed, because the nominator failed to even mention the previous discussions, and the closer made no mention of taking them into account. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 13:31, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
- Top category nominated at CFD, see here. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:47, 4 February 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose, because this creates ambiguity. The Oct 2016 CFD was flawed, because the nominator failed to even mention the previous discussions, and the closer made no mention of taking them into account. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 13:31, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
- Category:Wave of Terror in Europe to Category:Islamic terrorism in Europe (2014–present) – C2D: per Islamic terrorism in Europe (2014–present) Tim! (talk) 09:32, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
- Procedural oppose, it's on CFD already, see here. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:09, 29 January 2017 (UTC)
- Category:20th-century reformed church buildings upmerge to Category:20th-century Protestant churches per C2C Hugo999 (talk) 01:46, 15 January 2017 (UTC) (A small category with church buildings from several countries, and (more importantly) not part of a category tree for Evangelical or reformed (Reformed?) church buildings.
- Oppose: I have added it into Category:Reformed church buildings. This category is the result of an undiscussed out-of-process move by ServB1 (talk · contribs) last September, from Category:20th-century Evangelical church buildings. I see that he also moved the parent Category:Evangelical church buildings to Category:Presbyterian church buildings and emptied it; and made some edits to Category:Evangelical churches which I am not sure are helpful. Anyway, this one may as well be retained but renamed to Category:20th-century Reformed church buildings (see usage in e.g. the article Calvinism). – Fayenatic London 09:09, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
- Comment: the two Königsberg churches seem to be Lutheran (not Reformed) churches. The others, the Berlin Cathedral, Bad Homburg”, the “English Evangelical church in New York” and St Pauls in Kentucky are all described as “Evangelical” Hugo999 (talk) 11:31, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
- For: Hello, I agree with Hugo999 (talk · contribs). Protestant churches would be a best category for Lutheran and Reformed churches. Thank you very much. --ServB1 (talk) 23:16, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
- But no speedy criterion applies to this merge, so it would need a full CFD discussion. Or we could revert your undiscussed out-of-process moves, i.e. reinstate Evangelical. – Fayenatic London 12:54, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
- Evangelical would be worse than reformed with the current category content because Evangelical has a completely different meaning in English than it has in German. The scope of the category must have been Lutheran churches earlier on. Procedurally I agree with User:Fayenatic london that this nomination needs a normal discussion at CFD, it's not a speedy thing. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:47, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
- Moved 20th-century reformed church buildings to full discussion at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2017_January_31#20th-century reformed church buildings Hugo999 (talk) 03:51, 31 January 2017 (UTC)
- Evangelical would be worse than reformed with the current category content because Evangelical has a completely different meaning in English than it has in German. The scope of the category must have been Lutheran churches earlier on. Procedurally I agree with User:Fayenatic london that this nomination needs a normal discussion at CFD, it's not a speedy thing. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:47, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
- But no speedy criterion applies to this merge, so it would need a full CFD discussion. Or we could revert your undiscussed out-of-process moves, i.e. reinstate Evangelical. – Fayenatic London 12:54, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose: I have added it into Category:Reformed church buildings. This category is the result of an undiscussed out-of-process move by ServB1 (talk · contribs) last September, from Category:20th-century Evangelical church buildings. I see that he also moved the parent Category:Evangelical church buildings to Category:Presbyterian church buildings and emptied it; and made some edits to Category:Evangelical churches which I am not sure are helpful. Anyway, this one may as well be retained but renamed to Category:20th-century Reformed church buildings (see usage in e.g. the article Calvinism). – Fayenatic London 09:09, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
- Following my successful CFD nomination for "Populated waterside places" (the first entry at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2016 December 8), which covered all child categories with "populated [adjective] places" in the name, I was instructed to bring all affected categories here. Here's the list:
This is basically C2C, because CFD has established a new naming convention for the tree. However, it's not exactly a normal CFDS, since I just came here as a technically simple place to get the CFD result enforced; I don't think we ought to accept any objections. Nyttend (talk) 01:54, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose. The nominator Nyttend is right: this is not C2C, because the de facto convention remains in place. These categories should have included in the full CFD discussion in December, so that all affected categories were tagged for the attention of readers. CFD/S is for upholding existing naming conventions, not to function as a backdoor for avoiding a CFD listing of 200 categories. These need a full discussion, and tagging all 200 categories for that full discussion will hopefully gather more participation than the single !vote at the previous discussion. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 02:32, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
- @BrownHairedGirl: Really? I thought that as RM on a topic page is sufficient authority for a C2D category move, so a CfD consensus at the top of a hierarchy is sufficient for C2C moves further down. I've processed many such cases listed here in the past, e.g. "visitor attractions" to "tourist attractions" (renaming of that hierarchy is ongoing). – Fayenatic London 22:48, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
- @Fayenatic london: I haven't seen that done before, and I certainly don't approve of it. It's not what CFD/S criteria say.
I was going to say that it doesn't even save any work, because it's just as easy to use AWB to tag the categs for full CFD as for speedy ... but then I checked Nyttend's category recent contribs[2], and these categories don't appear. I checked a sample of the individual category pages, and found no speedy tags.
I dispute the right of a CFD closer to pronounce actions in respect of categories which were neither listed nor tagged in the nomination, but regardless of the merits of your close, Nyttend has gone way out-of-line here, and far exceeded your closing instructions, by ignoring CFD/S rules: untagged categories listed at CFD/S, objection ignored without comment, 48 hour CFD/S waiting period ignored by implementing the moves only 46 minutes after listing them, and by doing all this as a WP:INVOLVED admin. See User talk:Nyttend#Waterside_places_categories (permalink) for a defiantly hostile response to my request for a revert. <sad> --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 01:39, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
- @Fayenatic london: I haven't seen that done before, and I certainly don't approve of it. It's not what CFD/S criteria say.
- @BrownHairedGirl: Really? I thought that as RM on a topic page is sufficient authority for a C2D category move, so a CfD consensus at the top of a hierarchy is sufficient for C2C moves further down. I've processed many such cases listed here in the past, e.g. "visitor attractions" to "tourist attractions" (renaming of that hierarchy is ongoing). – Fayenatic London 22:48, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
- "Populated coastal places" sounds much more idiomatic to me than "coastal populated places". I don't have a good explanation at hand for why, but it does. A more standard example of the same phenomenon would be that you would always talk about a "big red ball", never a "red big ball". According to the scale on this web page, "coastal" should be very late in the adjective ordering, in the "nationality/origin" position. You might think that "populated" would be even later, in the "purpose" position, but my feeling is that it fits better into the catch-all "opinion" slot, which goes before all the other adjectives. —David Eppstein (talk) 02:30, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
- @David Eppstein: I don't have a view on the substantive merits of the renaming, and this is not the place to discuss them. My objection here is procedural.
Firstly, that a CFD closer does not have the right to dictate the use of CFD/S to bypass a full CFD, and these categories do not meet CFD/S criterion C2C.
And secondly that no editor or admin seeking to use CFD/S even in that way has a right to ignore CFD/S rules by a) not tagging the categs; b) ignoring objections without acknowledgement; c) ignoring the 48-hour wait period by implementing the moves only 46 minutes after listing them; d) to do all that as a WP:INVOLVED admin acting in respect of a CFD which they had themselves initiated. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 03:26, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
- @BrownHairedGirl and Nyttend: I agree with most of what BrownHairedGirl has written here. Apologies for my part in setting this off. I would have given Nyttend more guidance on using CFDS if I had realised that he was unfamiliar with the process (being more active on Commons, I gather). Certainly the nominated category pages need to be tagged, and certainly they must wait 48 hours before processing. Moreover, if there is opposition on any grounds, then they should not be processed speedily, unless that opposition is withdrawn.
- It has become accepted practice to speedily rename subcats following a CFD, where the changes appear uncontroversial, citing C2C, even though that is not exactly within the criteria as currently written. Recent examples are São Paulo (city) to São Paulo, accepted by Timrollpickering, and visitor attractions to tourist attractions, accepted by Od Mishehu (and again by Timrollpickering). Now that this practice has been questioned, I suggest we need a discussion on changes to the criteria.
- As for the categories nominated here, now that speedy renaming has been opposed (both on procedure by BrownHairedGirl and on merits by David Eppstein), they need to go to a full CFD. I suggest that this should present "Option A" and "Option B", either to approve the nomination, or to reverse the Dec 8 CFD. – Fayenatic London 21:53, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
- @Fayenatic london: thanks for that. I agree that a fresh CFD is the way forward, and your proposed option A/B format seems like the best way to do it, because it guarantees a consistent outcome for all the categs involved.
I know that you acted in the utmost good faith in suggesting a CFD/S followup (tho I think that doing so after a CFD with only 1 !vote was less wise), but since there is a disagreement on whether that is an appropriate way to proceed, may I suggest an RFC to resolve it? Then whatever the outcome of the RFC, this page's header can be updated to note the consensus on what is currently a grey area. (FWIW, my own view is that using CFD/S as a phase 2 of a full CFD impedes consensus-formation by depriving editors of notifications of the full discussion, and is also pointless because it saves no work -- all the tagging and listing still has to be done anyway. But let's see what an RFC concludes.)
As To Nyttend, I really don't think that you need take any responsibility for lack of hand-holding. Nyttend is an editor of ten years standing and an admin for nine years, so the community has every right to expect that when using an unfamiliar process they read the instructions and follow them, rather than pre-emptively dismissing both the instructions and the objections. The responsibility for that lies with Nyttend, not you. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 11:56, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose – to my UK ear 'Populated coastal place' sounds better. I'm not quite sure why 'Populated place' should be thought to be a compound noun, as opposed to 'coastal place'. Nyttend's actions have been egregious. Oculi (talk) 14:27, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
- @Fayenatic london: thanks for that. I agree that a fresh CFD is the way forward, and your proposed option A/B format seems like the best way to do it, because it guarantees a consistent outcome for all the categs involved.
- @David Eppstein: I don't have a view on the substantive merits of the renaming, and this is not the place to discuss them. My objection here is procedural.
- Oppose. The nominator Nyttend is right: this is not C2C, because the de facto convention remains in place. These categories should have included in the full CFD discussion in December, so that all affected categories were tagged for the attention of readers. CFD/S is for upholding existing naming conventions, not to function as a backdoor for avoiding a CFD listing of 200 categories. These need a full discussion, and tagging all 200 categories for that full discussion will hopefully gather more participation than the single !vote at the previous discussion. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 02:32, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
- Moved Populated waterside places to full discussion at WP:CFD 2017 January 16. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 00:54, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
- Pinging @Peterkingiron, David Eppstein, and Oculi: as previous participants on Dec 8 & above. – Fayenatic London 07:47, 16 January 2017 (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.