Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Speedy: Difference between revisions
Necrothesp (talk | contribs) |
|||
Line 67: | Line 67: | ||
<!-- 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:Films set in West Midlands (county)]] to [[:Category:Films set in the West Midlands (county)]] – C2C. -- [[User:Necrothesp|Necrothesp]] ([[User talk:Necrothesp|talk]]) 09:57, 13 March 2017 (UTC) |
|||
* [[:Category:History of Poland (966–1385)]] to [[:Category:History of Poland during the Piast dynasty]] – C2D, [[History of Poland (966–1385)]] redirects to [[History of Poland during the Piast dynasty]]. Pinging {{ping|Piotrus}}. [[User:Marcocapelle|Marcocapelle]] ([[User talk:Marcocapelle|talk]]) 20:10, 12 March 2017 (UTC) |
* [[:Category:History of Poland (966–1385)]] to [[:Category:History of Poland during the Piast dynasty]] – C2D, [[History of Poland (966–1385)]] redirects to [[History of Poland during the Piast dynasty]]. Pinging {{ping|Piotrus}}. [[User:Marcocapelle|Marcocapelle]] ([[User talk:Marcocapelle|talk]]) 20:10, 12 March 2017 (UTC) |
||
:* [[:Category:History of Poland (1385–1569)]] to [[:Category:History of Poland during the Jagiellonian dynasty]], likewise [[History of Poland (1385–1569)]] redirects to [[History of Poland during the Jagiellonian dynasty]] |
:* [[:Category:History of Poland (1385–1569)]] to [[:Category:History of Poland during the Jagiellonian dynasty]], likewise [[History of Poland (1385–1569)]] redirects to [[History of Poland during the Jagiellonian dynasty]] |
Revision as of 09:57, 13 March 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 16:37, 4 September 2024 (UTC). Currently, there are 2,140 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:Films set in West Midlands (county) to Category:Films set in the West Midlands (county) – C2C. -- Necrothesp (talk) 09:57, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
- Category:History of Poland (966–1385) to Category:History of Poland during the Piast dynasty – C2D, History of Poland (966–1385) redirects to History of Poland during the Piast dynasty. Pinging @Piotrus:. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:10, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
- Category:History of Poland (1385–1569) to Category:History of Poland during the Jagiellonian dynasty, likewise History of Poland (1385–1569) redirects to History of Poland during the Jagiellonian dynasty
- No objections, particularly considering that articles have already been renamed thus as noted. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:32, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
- Category:Wikipedians by alma mater: Mt. San Antonio College, Walnut to Category:Wikipedians by alma mater: Mt. San Antonio College – C2D Mt. San Antonio College, the creator of this cat really needs to learn how the category system works... <g> Le Deluge (talk) 17:50, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose. @Le Deluge: I think it's the nominator who is having a senior moment.<grin> This is a user category, not a mainspace category. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 17:55, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
- @BrownHairedGirl:The type of cat is no reason not to C2D surely? Otherwise you'd just get SAC, SAC Walnut, SAC Walnut CA, SAC Walnut California.... Le Deluge (talk) 18:26, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
- @Le Deluge: look at the whole tree under Category:Wikipedians by alma mater. They are all for users, not articles. If this was renamed to remove "Wikipedians" as you propose, the existing content would have to be removed per WP:USERNOCAT, because user pages do not belong in mainspace categories. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 18:31, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
- Doh, doh, doh. I'd not noticed that I'd elided the Wikipedians by alma mater bit, all I intended to do was chop off the Walnut. Now fixed - it shows the trauma I experience when people can't use category tags properly...Le Deluge (talk) 19:01, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
- Category:American expatriate soccer player people in Finland to Category:American expatriate soccer people in Finland – C2C: the title of this category is worded very awkwardly Joeykai (talk) 06:07, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
- Category:H&H Magnum Rifle cartridges to Category:Holland & Holland Magnum rifle cartridges – C2B: per Holland & Holland and C2A: fix capitalisation. Armbrust The Homunculus 01:33, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
- Category:Remington Arms Company to Category:Remington Arms – C2D: per Remington Arms. Armbrust The Homunculus 01:25, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
- Category:Emirati animination merge to Category:Emirati animation – C2A Le Deluge (talk) 01:16, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
- Category:Indian Badminton League team to Category:Premier Badminton League teams – C2B: per Premier Badminton League and C2A: pluralise as a set category. Armbrust The Homunculus 22:12, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
- Category:Forest Parks of New Zealand to Category:Forest parks of New Zealand – C2A: fix capitalisation per Forest parks of New Zealand. Armbrust The Homunculus 22:11, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
- Category:Swedish swim teams to Category:Swimming clubs in Sweden – C2C per rest of Category:Sports clubs by country Le Deluge (talk) 20:18, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
- Category:Sega Mega Drive/Sega Genesis emulators to Category:Sega Genesis emulators – C2D: To match Sega Genesis. The1337gamer (talk) 19:23, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
- Category:Indian Badminton League to Category:Premier Badminton League – C2D per Premier Badminton League after league renamed last year Le Deluge (talk) 15:36, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
- Category:Forest Parks of Thailand to Category:Forest parks of Thailand – C2A: Capitalisation Paul_012 (talk) 06:53, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
- Category:UT Martin people to Category:University of Tennessee at Martin people – C2B Jrcla2 (talk) 03:49, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
- Category:Tennessee–Martin Skyhawks women's basketball players to Category:UT Martin Skyhawks women's basketball players – C2B/C2D Jrcla2 (talk) 03:49, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
- Category:Nazi SA to Category:Sturmabteilung – C2D: per Sturmabteilung. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:58, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
- Category:Funimation Entertainment to Category:Funimation – C2D: per Funimation, stable since 2015. Armbrust The Homunculus 11:22, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
- Category:Roman Catholic Universities and colleges in Connecticut to Category:Roman Catholic universities and colleges in Connecticut – C2C per convention of parent Category:Roman Catholic universities and colleges in the United States by state, grandparent Category:Roman Catholic universities and colleges in the United States, and so on to Category:Roman Catholic universities and colleges. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 09:46, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
- Category:Roman Catholic Universities and colleges in Massachusetts to Category:Roman Catholic universities and colleges in Massachusetts
- Category:Roman Catholic Universities and colleges in Michigan to Category:Roman Catholic universities and colleges in Michigan
- Category:Roman Catholic Universities and colleges in Minnesota to Category:Roman Catholic universities and colleges in Minnesota
- Category:Roman Catholic Universities and colleges in Nebraska to Category:Roman Catholic universities and colleges in Nebraska
- Category:Roman Catholic Universities and colleges in Pennsylvania to Category:Roman Catholic universities and colleges in Pennsylvania
- Category:Roman Catholic Universities and colleges in Vermont to Category:Roman Catholic universities and colleges in Vermont
- Comment: As the parent categories eg Category:Catholic Church and Category:Catholic Church in Pennsylvania have been renamed (from Roman Catholic etc) following discussion on 29 October 2016 should these subcategories follow? (as part of a massive change) Hugo999 (talk) 23:20, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
- Category:Remington Arms Company cartidges to Category:Remington Arms Company cartridges – C2A Le Deluge (talk) 02:56, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
- @Le Deluge: This should be renamed to Category:Remington Arms cartridges as C2B per Remington Arms. Armbrust The Homunculus 22:04, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
- I'm fine with that, but the hierarchy is at RAC - I was just going for the simple typo but if you want to C2D it then that works for me.Le Deluge (talk) 01:16, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
- @Le Deluge: Done some. Category:.35 Remington firearms should stay where it is (main article is .35 Remington) and I'm unsure about the Magnum subcategories. Armbrust The Homunculus 01:30, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
- @Armbrust: I'm no expert but I'd say that's getting into WP:COMMONNAME territory - the guns seem to take the formal name (RA) whereas the cartridges have genericised and so they get the less formal "Remington" without the Arms let alone the Company. But even then I suspect common usage for many of the guns would drop the Arms, I'm not sure how tight the firearms editors are on that kind of thing. Le Deluge (talk) 01:36, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
- I'm fine with that, but the hierarchy is at RAC - I was just going for the simple typo but if you want to C2D it then that works for me.Le Deluge (talk) 01:16, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
- @Le Deluge: This should be renamed to Category:Remington Arms cartridges as C2B per Remington Arms. Armbrust The Homunculus 22:04, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
- Category:Farsley A.F.C. to Category:Farsley Celtic F.C. – C2D per Farsley Celtic F.C.. Number 57 17:07, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose speedy Only recently moved and without discussion. Armbrust The Homunculus 21:56, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
- @Armbrust: I appreciate that it's not apparent from the edit history as I have recently performed a history merge, but the article was moved over 18 months ago via cut & paste from Farsley A.F.C. to Farsley Celtic F.C. (you can see the relevant diff here), so it's not a recent move. Would you mind withdrawing your opposition (presumably you saw my recent merge of info from Farsley Celtic A.F.C., but that was the predecessor club and doesn't have any affect on the reformed club's main category). Thanks, Number 57 13:13, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
Opposed nominations
- Category:Lawyers in Saskatchewan to Category:Lawyers from Saskatchewan – C2C. Rathfelder (talk) 19:18, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
- Category:Lawyers in Quebec to Category:Lawyers from Quebec – C2C. Rathfelder (talk) 19:17, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
- Category:Lawyers in Prince Edward Island to Category:Lawyers from Prince Edward Island – C2C. Rathfelder (talk) 19:17, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
- Category:Lawyers in Ontario to Category:Lawyers from Ontario – C2C. Rathfelder (talk) 19:16, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
- Category:Lawyers in Nova Scotia to Category:Lawyers from Nova Scotia – C2C. Rathfelder (talk) 19:15, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
- Category:Lawyers in Newfoundland and Labrador to Category:Lawyers from Newfoundland and Labrador – C2C. Rathfelder (talk) 19:15, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
- Category:Lawyers in New Brunswick to Category:Lawyers from New Brunswick – C2C. Rathfelder (talk) 19:14, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
- Category:Lawyers in Manitoba to Category:Lawyers from Manitoba – C2C. Rathfelder (talk) 19:14, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
- Category:Lawyers in British Columbia to Category:Lawyers from British Columbia – C2C. Rathfelder (talk) 19:13, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
- Category:Lawyers in Alberta to Category:Lawyers from Alberta – C2C. Rathfelder (talk) 19:12, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose lawyers nominations. The categories make it clear that these lawyers are either a member of the local law society or practice in the province (they are not necessarily from there). Armbrust The Homunculus 23:39, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
- The same is true of all the other lawyer categories. Though most of the Canadian lawyers were clearly also from the areas. We could change all the categories to be "in", but there are a lot more of them. Rathfelder (talk) 13:47, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
- Category:Scottish regiments to Category:Regiments of Scotland – C2C: per Category:Regiments by country, and parent Category:Regiments of the United Kingdom Tim! (talk) 09:02, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose speedy The main article is Scottish regiment. Armbrust The Homunculus 23:18, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose @Tim!: There's a whole lot of complicated history going on there, but in essence - these are regiments that are culturally Scottish organisations of the United Kingdom (qv the Ghurkas) rather than units of an independent Scotland - for instance the Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders were based in Kent until they fell victim to defence cuts. It's not the only UK versus home nations category that has that kind of problem, although it's a particularly clear-cut example.Le Deluge (talk) 16:35, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose speedy The main article is Scottish regiment. Armbrust The Homunculus 23:18, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
- Category:Jharkhand MLAs 2000-2005 to Category:Jharkhand MLAs 2000–05 – C2A: use endash. Also C2C use YYYY–YY per convention of Category:State legislators of Indian States by term. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 01:08, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose as proposed abbreviating the last year to two digits goes against MOS:DATERANGE. Armbrust The Homunculus 23:13, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
- @Armbrust:. I am aware that MOS:DATERANGE has changed. However, all the other Indian MLA categories still use the old YYYY–YY format, and this move fixes one part of the problem and at least achieves consistency within the group. I don't have the energy to nominate all the hundreds of other Indian MLA categories, so unless you are willing to do that, then the only effect of you oppose is to block consistency. How does making the best the enemy of the good help? --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 12:50, 7 March 2017 (UTC)
- Comment: Sports years eg Category:2015–16 in British rugby union use the YYYY-YY format for northern hemisphere winter sports etc and should be regarded as the standard format for sports years. A recent nifty template using this format displays past and future seasons. I was not aware of MOS:DATERANGE and do not see the YYYY-YYYY format as an improvement. Hugo999 (talk) 22:59, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
- @Hugo999: If you read MOS:DATERANGE, than you can see that the YYYY-YY format still can be used for consecutive years if reliable sources use that. Armbrust The Homunculus 03:03, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
- @Armbrust: As usual my position is that consistency and predictability is paramount for categories - it makes life so much easier for bots and template coders. Which in turn makes life much easier for everybody, even if they don't realise it. As the author of the aforementioned {{navseasoncats}}, I'd say about 40% of the coding time and 70% of the testing time was spent on handling one exception - what happens around the millennium. Now that's an exception you can't really avoid and so it was worth the effort in dealing with it - but adding exceptions just to make things look pretty creates work for the sake of it, and the result will be fewer, less effective templates for working with categories. Having nnnn-nn for 1-year seasons and nnnn-nnnn for 5-year "seasons" is an exception for the sake of it. I'd also note that neither MOS:DATERANGE nor the original RfC make any reference to categories, but I'd argue that when the RfC summary says "when space is at a premium, such as in tables or infoboxes, two year date styles may be used" that also applies to the cat list at the bottom of articles - qv recent discussions about MPs of British Parliamentary terms. I'd also suggest that MOS:DATEVAR applied to categories is essentially an argument for C2C as per BHG's original proposal.
Whilst I'm here - for those that hadn't noticed {{navseasoncats}} has had a major update, so it now works with single years and decades as well as 1-year seasons, and the year can be anywhere in the category's name. I'm also planning to add centuries, intervals etc - see |my userpage for the current roadmap.Le Deluge (talk) 16:15, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
- @Armbrust: As usual my position is that consistency and predictability is paramount for categories - it makes life so much easier for bots and template coders. Which in turn makes life much easier for everybody, even if they don't realise it. As the author of the aforementioned {{navseasoncats}}, I'd say about 40% of the coding time and 70% of the testing time was spent on handling one exception - what happens around the millennium. Now that's an exception you can't really avoid and so it was worth the effort in dealing with it - but adding exceptions just to make things look pretty creates work for the sake of it, and the result will be fewer, less effective templates for working with categories. Having nnnn-nn for 1-year seasons and nnnn-nnnn for 5-year "seasons" is an exception for the sake of it. I'd also note that neither MOS:DATERANGE nor the original RfC make any reference to categories, but I'd argue that when the RfC summary says "when space is at a premium, such as in tables or infoboxes, two year date styles may be used" that also applies to the cat list at the bottom of articles - qv recent discussions about MPs of British Parliamentary terms. I'd also suggest that MOS:DATEVAR applied to categories is essentially an argument for C2C as per BHG's original proposal.
- @Hugo999: If you read MOS:DATERANGE, than you can see that the YYYY-YY format still can be used for consecutive years if reliable sources use that. Armbrust The Homunculus 03:03, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose as proposed abbreviating the last year to two digits goes against MOS:DATERANGE. Armbrust The Homunculus 23:13, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
- Category:Bombay State MLAs 1957-60 to Category:Bombay State MLAs 1957–60 – C2A: use endash. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 01:05, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose as proposed The last year should be expanded to four digits per MOS:DATERANGE. Armbrust The Homunculus 23:29, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
- @Armbrust:. I am aware that MOS:DATERANGE has changed. However, all the other Indian MLA categories still use the old YYYY–YY format, and this move fixes one part of the problem and at least achieves consistency within the group. I don't have the energy to nominate all the hundreds of other Indian MLA categories, so unless you are willing to do that, then the only effect of you oppose is to block consistency. How does making the best the enemy of the good help? --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 12:50, 7 March 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose as proposed The last year should be expanded to four digits per MOS:DATERANGE. Armbrust The Homunculus 23:29, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
- Category:Arunachal Pradesh MLAs 2014-19 to Category:Arunachal Pradesh MLAs 2014–19 – C2A: use endash. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 01:04, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose as proposed The last year should be expanded to four digits per MOS:DATERANGE. Armbrust The Homunculus 23:29, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
- @Armbrust:. I am aware that MOS:DATERANGE has changed. However, all the other Indian MLA categories still use the old YYYY–YY format, and this move fixes one part of the problem and at least achieves consistency within the group. I don't have the energy to nominate all the hundreds of other Indian MLA categories, so unless you are willing to do that, then the only effect of you oppose is to block consistency. How does making the best the enemy of the good help? --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 12:50, 7 March 2017 (UTC)
- @Armbrust: Please can you have another look at this one? I really cannot see how anything useful is achieved by leaving this with a hyphen rather than endash, and it in no way prejudices a wider change of all the Indian MLA categories to the YYYY-YYYY format if you or anyone else wants to propose that wider change. Please can you clarify why you oppose changing a hyphen to an endash? --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 16:31, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
- @Armbrust:. I am aware that MOS:DATERANGE has changed. However, all the other Indian MLA categories still use the old YYYY–YY format, and this move fixes one part of the problem and at least achieves consistency within the group. I don't have the energy to nominate all the hundreds of other Indian MLA categories, so unless you are willing to do that, then the only effect of you oppose is to block consistency. How does making the best the enemy of the good help? --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 12:50, 7 March 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose as proposed The last year should be expanded to four digits per MOS:DATERANGE. Armbrust The Homunculus 23:29, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
- Category:Bihar MLAs 2000-04 to Category:Bihar MLAs 2000–04 – C2A: use endash BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 00:56, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
- Category:Bihar MLAs 1952-57 to Category:Bihar MLAs 1952–57
- Category:Bihar MLAs 1957-62 to Category:Bihar MLAs 1957–62
- Category:Bihar MLAs 1962-67 to Category:Bihar MLAs 1962–67
- Category:Bihar MLAs 1967-69 to Category:Bihar MLAs 1967–69
- Category:Bihar MLAs 1969-72 to Category:Bihar MLAs 1969–72
- Category:Bihar MLAs 1972-77 to Category:Bihar MLAs 1972–77
- Category:Bihar MLAs 1977-80 to Category:Bihar MLAs 1977–80
- Category:Bihar MLAs 1980-85 to Category:Bihar MLAs 1980–85
- Category:Bihar MLAs 1985-90 to Category:Bihar MLAs 1985–90
- Category:Bihar MLAs 1990-95 to Category:Bihar MLAs 1990–95
- Category:Bihar MLAs 1995-2000 to Category:Bihar MLAs 1995–2000
- Oppose as proposed The last year should be expanded to four digits per MOS:DATERANGE. Armbrust The Homunculus 23:29, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
- @Armbrust:. I am aware that MOS:DATERANGE has changed. However, all the other Indian MLA categories still use the old YYYY–YY format, and this move fixes one part of the problem and at least achieves consistency within the group. I don't have the energy to nominate all the hundreds of other Indian MLA categories, so unless you are willing to do that, then the only effect of you oppose is to block consistency. How does making the best the enemy of the good help? --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 12:50, 7 March 2017 (UTC)
- Category:Benedictine nunneries in England to Category:Benedictine monasteries of nuns in England – C2C: Completing misplaced 2014 request by @Daniel the Monk: — Train2104 (t • c) 21:26, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
- Category:Benedictine nunneries in Austria to Category:Benedictine monasteries of nuns in Austria – C2C: Completing misplaced 2014 request by @Daniel the Monk: — Train2104 (t • c) 21:26, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
- Category:Benedictine nunneries in Germany to Category:Benedictine monasteries of nuns in Germany – C2C: Completing misplaced 2014 request by @Daniel the Monk: — Train2104 (t • c) 21:26, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose speedy for the above three. There is no clear convention in Category:Benedictine monasteries of nuns for the proposed format. Armbrust The Homunculus 04:54, 2 March 2017 (UTC)
- @Train2104: It seems that Armbrust forgot to ping you, but these have been opposed, so they need either a full CFD discussion (see WP:CFD), or to be withdrawn. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 09:28, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
- I am merely procedurally completing incomplete nominations, I'll withdraw absent comment from User:Daniel the Monk (who hasn't been active in a few months) — Train2104 (t • c) 17:09, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
- @Train2104, BrownHairedGirl, and Armbrust: I'd have thought that WP:COMMONNAME is overwhelmingly "nunnery" rather than "monastery of nuns" so unless there's a really good technical reason not to go with the WP:COMMONNAME then that's the way I'd go.Le Deluge (talk) 16:19, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
- @Le Deluge: I agree that it looks like a good idea, but I don't see a speedy criterion to support that. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 17:08, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
- Personally I'd go for C2C-influenced-by-WP:COMMONNAME, but if someone wants to CfD it....Le Deluge (talk) 18:23, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
- @Le Deluge: I agree that it looks like a good idea, but I don't see a speedy criterion to support that. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 17:08, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
- @Train2104, BrownHairedGirl, and Armbrust: I'd have thought that WP:COMMONNAME is overwhelmingly "nunnery" rather than "monastery of nuns" so unless there's a really good technical reason not to go with the WP:COMMONNAME then that's the way I'd go.Le Deluge (talk) 16:19, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
- I am merely procedurally completing incomplete nominations, I'll withdraw absent comment from User:Daniel the Monk (who hasn't been active in a few months) — Train2104 (t • c) 17:09, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
- @Train2104: It seems that Armbrust forgot to ping you, but these have been opposed, so they need either a full CFD discussion (see WP:CFD), or to be withdrawn. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 09:28, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose speedy for the above three. There is no clear convention in Category:Benedictine monasteries of nuns for the proposed format. Armbrust The Homunculus 04:54, 2 March 2017 (UTC)
- Category:Association football people by country to Category:Association football people by nationality – C2C: per the convention in Category:Sportspeople by sport and nationality. Armbrust The Homunculus 14:25, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose. @Armbrust this is a container for categories of footballers in a country, who may not be of that nationality. See the similar distinction between Category:Association football players by country and Category:Association football players by nationality. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 15:35, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
- @BrownHairedGirl: In that case, however, it shouldn't be in Category:Sportspeople by sport and nationality at all. Armbrust The Homunculus 15:51, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
- @Armbrust: you may be right about that, and if so, then some juggling of parent categories may be required.
However, the underlying question is that since this all arises from a desire not to put expatriate footballers in Fooland under a "Fooish people" category, hoe far up the tree do we pursue the distinction? I am far from sure that it is a good idea to retain this distinction in the category system, because I don't think that our general intermixing of people-by-nationality with people-by-place supports it. For example, an American expatriate artist in Paris may be there for all their notable career, possibly many decades, so it would be folly not to categorise them under Category:People from Paris .... but that places them under Category:French people. I see no problem with that, but the sports categories are based on the assumption that such fuzziness doesn't exist. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 16:01, 28 February 2017 (UTC)- @Armbrust: This is a can of worms that is way too complex for a speedy. @BrownHairedGirl: I think the sports categories don't assume that kind of fuzziness doesn't exist, it's more that it's very common for footballers in particular to move around the globe, often on an annual basis - but for a very short time, maybe 6-8 years at the peak of their careers. So they don't get entrenched in the way that your artist would, so they don't identify as "French" - but at the same time, their two most defining characteristics at any one time are the team they are playing for and their international team (which is defined more strictly than citizenship - you can have two passports but only one football nationality). And for many footballers from smaller countries like say Ryan Giggs, they are defined more by the club than their country as they win many more trophies with their club than country. So personally I'd let sleeping dogs lie.... Le Deluge (talk) 18:23, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
- @Armbrust: you may be right about that, and if so, then some juggling of parent categories may be required.
- @BrownHairedGirl: In that case, however, it shouldn't be in Category:Sportspeople by sport and nationality at all. Armbrust The Homunculus 15:51, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose. @Armbrust this is a container for categories of footballers in a country, who may not be of that nationality. See the similar distinction between Category:Association football players by country and Category:Association football players by nationality. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 15:35, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
- Category:Moving files to the Commons to Category:Moving files to Commons – C2D 77.179.33.78 (talk) 19:23, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose as proposed This should be renamed to Category:Moving files to Wikimedia Commons as a subcategory of Category:Wikimedia Commons. Armbrust The Homunculus 14:48, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
- Category:Apostolic nuncios to Category:Apostolic Nuncios – C2C: every subcategory uses upper-case for "Nuncios". Armbrust The Homunculus 15:42, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose, probably I don't know the niceties of papal procedure, but I would guess that this is one of those cases where titles are capitalised but the collective noun is not. Qv The Queen of England being one of a number of queens, or Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother being categorised in Category:Queen mothers. Le Deluge (talk) 19:13, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
- Category:Government in Nigeria merge to Category:Government of Nigeria – C2C in line with rest of Category:Government by country Le Deluge (talk) 01:46, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose – these are different, one includes State Governments. Category:Government in the United States and Category:Government of the United States is a similar set-up. Oculi (talk) 01:04, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
- The US and Slovenia are the only countries to do it that way out of >200 categories, the norm is to include local government in with national government. Hence C2C. Le Deluge (talk) 04:02, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose. The distinction should be a applied to more countries, rather than removed from these two. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 16:08, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
- Category:Korean companies established in 2004 to Category:South Korean companies established in 2004 – C2B convention is to specify North or South for these kind of "national" categories, rather than using the ethnic term "Korean" (and the contents are all South Korean) Le Deluge (talk) 10:26, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose. @Le Deluge, FAICS, the convention for North and South Korean categories is to retain an undivided Korea category as a parent. So in this case the solution is to create a new Category:South Korean companies established in 2004 as a subcat of Category:Korean companies established in 2004. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 11:59, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
- There's logic in that for cultural things - but companies are legal creations of a specific jurisdiction. So there can be no "Korean" companies in 2004, it can only be a container category for at most two jurisdictions (and I suspect we're not going to be seeing too many North Korean companies in 2004). So this is a WP:SMALLCAT of at best two categories.Le Deluge (talk) 23:20, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
On hold pending other discussion
- None currently
Moved to full discussion
- Category:Sharjah (emirate) to Category:Emirate of Sharjah – C2D: Complete 2014 request by @Gryffindor: misplaced on talk page — Train2104 (t • c) 21:20, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose until the subcategories are not nominated too. Armbrust The Homunculus 17:22, 2 March 2017 (UTC)
- @Armbrust: IMHO the nomination would achieve consistency C2C with the other emirates as it stands, without changing the sub-categories; see the contents of Category:Emirates of the United Arab Emirates, especially of Category:Emirate of Abu Dhabi. – Fayenatic London 19:39, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose until the subcategories are not nominated too. Armbrust The Homunculus 17:22, 2 March 2017 (UTC)
- Category:2017 Alpine Skiing World Cup to Category:2016–17 Alpine Skiing World Cup – C2D: Completing IP nomination - match name of primary article. — Train2104 (t • c) 14:58, 2 March 2017 (UTC)
- Question: Greenock125 has now moved the page 2016–17 Alpine Skiing World Cup to 2017 Alpine Skiing World Cup (over previous redirect). @Greenock125: are you sure that was correct, as the dates straddle two calendar years? – Fayenatic London 20:58, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
- The page move has been undone, but this category may not be needed for long as I've put up the "subpages" at AFD. — Train2104 (t • c) 02:56, 7 March 2017 (UTC)
- The relevant discussion is at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2016 Alpine Skiing World Cup/Men's Alpine Combined. Armbrust The Homunculus 22:19, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
- The category is now listed for upmerging at CFD 2017 March 12. – Fayenatic London 20:29, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
- Question: Greenock125 has now moved the page 2016–17 Alpine Skiing World Cup to 2017 Alpine Skiing World Cup (over previous redirect). @Greenock125: are you sure that was correct, as the dates straddle two calendar years? – Fayenatic London 20:58, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
- Category:Perth City Link precinct to Category:Perth City Link – C2D: per Perth City Link. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:48, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
- Comment - Perth city link and its connotations in the media do not necessarily fit the 'Perth City Link' - they can be seen to be different JarrahTree 07:59, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
- Comment - It may be helpful if the {{cat explanation}} on Category:Perth City Link precinct explicitly and unambiguously stated the intended scope of the category, in particular whether it is the same as or different to the scope of the Perth City Link article. Mitch Ames (talk) 09:01, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
- Comment - the Project is that - a 'development project' , the 'precinct' is the land in/on which it is contained - I fail to see how the two are seen as synonymous to encourage this form of action. JarrahTree 09:17, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
- I fail to see how the project and the land are distinguishable in terms of providing content for the category. Marcocapelle (talk) 14:22, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
- Comment in that case maybe it needs to go somehwere else than speedy JarrahTree 15:03, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
- Moved to CFD. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:57, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
- Category:Modalities to Category:Linguistic modalities – C2D: per Linguistic modality. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:44, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose IMO Linguistic modality isn't the main article of the category. (Probability isn't a linguistic concept.) Armbrust The Homunculus 15:36, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
- I have removed the "main article" link from the page. – Fayenatic London 14:47, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose IMO Linguistic modality isn't the main article of the category. (Probability isn't a linguistic concept.) Armbrust The Homunculus 15:36, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
- At full CfD there is now an alternative nomination to delete. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:11, 27 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)
- @Marcocapelle: I have moved this to the opposed section. @Armbrust: it is helpful to ping the nominator when entering an oppose. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 13:33, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose speedy Subcategory of Category:9th-century Ukrainian people. Armbrust The Homunculus 07:17, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
- I'll move this to CfD one of these days. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:45, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
- It's now on CfD, see here. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:10, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
- 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: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: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)
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.