Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Speedy

"WP:CFDS" redirects here. For the criteria for speedy deletion, see WP:CFSD.

Speedy renaming or speedy merging of categories may be requested only if they meet a speedy criterion, for example WP:C2D (consistency with main article's name) or WP:C2C (consistency with established category tree names). Please see instructions below.

1. Determine which speedy criterion applies
2. Tag category with {{subst:cfr-speedy|New name}}
3. List request along with speedy criteria reason under "Current requests" below on this page

Please note that a speedy request must state which of the narrowly defined criteria strictly applies. Hence, any other non-speedy criteria, even "common sense" or "obvious", may be suitable points but only at a full discussion at WP:Categories for discussion.

Request may take 48 hours to process after listing if there are no objections. This delay allows other users to review the request to ensure that it meets the speedy 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") can be tagged with the regular speedy tags, such as {{db|reason}} with no required delay. Empty categories can be deleted if they remain empty 7 days after tagging with {{db-empty}}. Renaming under C2E can also be processed instantly as it is a variation on G7.

Contested speedy 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, it may be requested regularly at WP:Categories for discussion (CfD) in accordance with its instructions.

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: Consistency with 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: Consistency with established category tree names

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: Consistency with main article'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 (i) after a page move discussion resulted in explicit consensus to rename, or (ii) unilaterally to reflect an official renaming which is verified by one or more citations (provided in the nomination). If the page names are controversial or ambiguous in any way, then this criterion does not apply, even if an article is the primary topic of its name.
• 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.

Admin instructions

When handling the listings:

1. Make sure that the listing meets one of the above criteria.
2. With the exception of C2E, make sure that it was both listed and tagged at least 48 hours previously.
3. Make sure that there are no oppositions to the listing; if there is a discussion, check if the opposing user(s) ended up withdrawing the opposition(s).

If the listing meets these criteria, simply have the category renamed - follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Administrator instructions, in the section "If the decision is Delete, Merge, or Rename"; to list it for the bots, use the Speedy moves section.

Applying speedy criteria in full discussions

• 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 23:12, 12 June 2024 (UTC). Currently, there are 65 open requests ().

---

Current requests

• Category:United States Navy in the 20th-century to Category:United States Navy in the 20th century - shouldn't be hyphenated. Anomalous+0 (talk) 21:23, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
• Category:Whistleblower Reward Programs to Category:Whistleblower reward programs - C2A: change to lowercase; not a proper name. Anomalous+0 (talk) 09:23, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
• Category:Cal State Fullerton Titans Soccer to Category:Cal State Fullerton Titans soccer – C2C: to match other categories in Category:College soccer teams in the United States Joeykai (talk) 08:33, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

• Category:Shaman (Brazilian band) albums to Category:Shaman (band) albums – C2D: Per Shaman (band).-- Mike Selinker (talk) 21:37, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

  Oppose because Korpiklaani used that name between 1996 and 2003. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 09:58, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

• Category:Eastern AA to Category:Eastern Sports Club – C2D per Eastern Sports Club. Matthew hk (talk) 17:20, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Category:Eastern AA coaches to Category:Eastern Sports Club football managers – C2C as a subcat of Football managers in Hong Kong by club plus ambiguity of basketball managers and C2D per Eastern Sports Club. Matthew hk (talk) 17:50, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

Opposed requests

• Category:Draft dodgers to Category:Draft evaders – C2D: Article and main category is Draft evasion, which is less pejorative. Rathfelder (talk) 12:15, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

  Oppose speedy IMO that's too much of a difference from the main article to C2D to apply. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 09:55, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

  I support the change in terminology but C2D does not apply to set categories. -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 22:48, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

• Category:Airport rail links in London to Category:Airport rail links in the London region; more accurate description, as most airports serving London are technically outside London but considered to be in the London Region; will also be consistent with parent Category:Airports in the London region Cnbrb (talk) 22:50, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

  Oppose. @Cnbrb: there is no Category:London region. The parent cat should be renamed. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 13:56, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

  Comment: true, but then how should the parent category be renamed? It presents the problem that Gatwick, Luton and Stansted airports are not themselves in Greater London, so how are they to be sensibly categorised? London region is understandable to the reader, and I'm not sure that it follows that there must be a London region category. The word "in" is perhaps problematic - "Airports serving London" might work, but it is not consistent with the other categories in Category:Airports by city. Cnbrb (talk) 16:31, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

  @Cnbrb: Category:Airports by city is a bit of a mess. It contains several categories which are not by city, e.g. Category:Airports in the San Francisco Bay Area relates to San Francisco Bay Area.

  It seems to me that the best solution would probably be to rename the lot to Category:Airports serving Foo. That would be better than inventing a region, with is what has happened here. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 19:48, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

  How would you define "serving"? Some airports have a practical catchment area of multiple cities and then there's the annoying habit of rebranding some distant little airport to include the name of a major city that's nowhere near - to take a couple of extreme examples, does "Paris-Vatry (Disney)" serve Paris? Does "London Oxford" serve London? Timrollpickering (Talk) 19:57, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

  Fair point, Timrollpickering.

  But the current name puts Oxford in the "London Region", which is also nonsense.

  So I wonder if the answer isn't more fundamental: that the whole concept of Category:Airports by city is broken, because airports are a) often outside the city limits, and b) usually serve huge catchment areas.

  For example, Heathrow and Gatwick are pretty much national airports for England. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 20:06, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

  Looks like I've inadvertently opened a can of worms! Well, some interesting comments here. I agree that Category:Airports by city should be revisited, and I agree with @User:BrownHairedGirl to go for Category:Airports serving Foo. Yes, airports do also serve other towns or regions, but the common understanding is that an airport is associated with a large city like London or San Francisco. "Airports serving London" makes immediate sense to the reader. And yes, in southern England there is now a tendency for some regional airports to rebrand themselves with the "London" name to make themselves seem more attractive ("London Oxford"), and while I agree that this is a bit tenuous, I don't think Wikipedia should pass judgement on how ridiculous these may be. There may be some grey areas, but we can work around those. Cnbrb (talk) 11:55, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

  It goes a lot further than southern England and also isn't always the airports themselves - sometimes airlines tack on the name of a popular city without mentioning the lengthy connection (just google "London Prestwick" for one of the more notorious cases) and in both the examples given above the city name isn't actually in the formal name of the airport. Invariably there would have to be judgement because different sources will say different things. Timrollpickering (Talk) 13:03, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

  @Cnbrb: sorry to be annoying, but I think that @Timrollpickering has effectively demolished my suggestion of a Category:Airports serving Foo. I think he has demonstrated very clearly that it wouldn't be viable without masses of WP:OR by editors.

  So I think that the only solution is to categorise airports by their actual location, according to whatever geographical categories we use for other topics. It seems to be the only way of avoiding either a) using madey-uppy geography like "London Region", or b) encouraging editors to make slews of subjective judgements about marketing claims.

  Europe's biggest airline Ryanair systematically associates airports with cities which can be up to 3 hours travel away. Their efforts alone would make any such category tree a nightmare of editorial disputes. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 13:23, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

  I appreciate the arguments, but this outcome will create the situation where Gatwick Airport will not be categorised as a London airport, but as a Surrey airport, when it is in every common understanding London Gatwick Airport. I don't know how we can square that particular circle, except to create a categorisation scheme that is not intuitive to the reader. All I can think of is to create list pages in their place.Cnbrb (talk) 20:11, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

• Category:Serology templates to Category:Serology navigational boxes – C2B: Category seems to have been intended as a navbox category and all of its members are indeed serology-related navboxes, but the current title does not clarify that. It reads like it is for Serology templates in general. Please move this category.  — Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs)  02:12, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

  Oppose Template:SerotypeA normal and Template:SerotypeC normall are not navigational boxes. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 08:35, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

• Category:Fictional characters with energy manipulation powers to Category:Fictional characters with energy abilities – C2c, in agreement with many subcategories of Category:Fictional characters by superhuman feature or ability; even those that do not do not follow this naming convention. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 11:10, 19 December 2018 (UTC)

  Partial oppose. Category:Fictional characters with energy-manipulation abilities would be a better name. Not only does it follow similar categories, but it also clarifies its subject. — Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs)  05:45, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

  Or perhaps Category:Fictional characters who can manipulate energy... as you noted, there does not seem to be an accepted convention in Category:Fictional characters by superhuman feature or ability. Either way, I think this is not straightforward enough for CFD/S; a full nomination would be more suited. -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 19:10, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

• Category:Piteå IF (women) players to Category:Piteå IF players – C2D Bring back Daz Sampson (talk) 09:55, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

  Oppose because Category:Piteå IF (men) players exists. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 14:34, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

• Category:Civic and political organizations of China to Category:Political organizations in China – C2C: None of these organisations are "civic" Rathfelder (talk) 12:11, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

  Oppose speedy. How does this fall under C2C? -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 20:34, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

• Category:Defunct organisations based in Oman to Category:Defunct organizations based in Oman – C2C: Per parents Category:Organizations based in Oman and Category:Defunct organizations by country. Oculi (talk) 18:48, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

  Weak oppose - Oman has strong historical ties to the UK, so the parent should probably be renamed to Category:Organisations based in Oman. -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 20:34, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

• Category:Burial sites of Royal families of Sweden to Category:Burial sites of Swedish royal families – WP:C2C: Category:Burial sites of European royal families. Chicbyaccident (talk) 17:19, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

  Oppose speedy Subcategory of Category:Royal families of Sweden. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 17:32, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

• Category:Flora of Swaziland to Category:Flora of Eswatini – C2D: Per Eswatini. feminist (talk) 16:42, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

  Oppose speedy This category was explicitly excluded from renaming during this CFD per Peter coxhead's comment. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 19:43, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

  Oppose for the present. Experience shows that errors result if Flora distribution categories have significantly different names from those used in the current WGSRPD (and "Swaziland" and "Eswatini" are substantially different – the code is "SWZ" which isn't recognisable as "Eswatini"). All the major plant taxonomic databases currently use "Swaziland" or "SWZ". At some point they may catch up (a new version of the WGSRPD is rumoured); until then a category redirect is fine. Peter coxhead (talk) 20:03, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

  OK thanks. I did not notice that discussion. Perhaps some sort of comment should be added to the category? feminist (talk) 08:53, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

• Category:Balti dynasty to Category:Balt dynasty – C2D. Citations provided for new name at article. Srnec (talk) 15:04, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

  Oppose speedy Only recently moved and without discussion, thus C2D doesn't apply. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 13:27, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

• Category:People from Tendring (district) to Category:People from Tendring District – C2D per Tendring District, for the same reasons as Gedling. Crouch, Swale (talk) 21:28, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
• Category:People from Tandridge (district) to Category:People from Tandridge District – C2D per Tandridge District, for the same reasons as Gedling. Crouch, Swale (talk) 21:26, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
• Category:People from Gedling (district) to Category:People from the Borough of Gedling – C2D per Borough of Gedling, see the recent RM. Note that Category:Gedling is a combined category for both the village and district, similar to Category:Rotherham. Category:People from Gedling should be created for the village if needed. Crouch, Swale (talk) 21:24, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

  For the 3 above, are the villages and districts coterminous? If not, why are their categories combined? And if they should remain combined, should we not follow the parent categories' naming conventions—i.e. Category:People from Gedling, Category:People from Tandridge, Category:People from Tendring? -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 23:34, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

  No the districts cover a far larger area than the villages[1]. Although separate categories for the villages and districts are unlikely to be needed anytime soon (few villages at all have cats at all, let alone those that share the name with a district). However its more likely that separate categories will be created for the people from categories, see Category:Blaby for example which also has Category:People from Blaby. Crouch, Swale (talk) 10:38, 2 December 2018 (UTC)

  Oppose if the parent categories (Category:Gedling, Category:Tandridge & Category:Tendring) are not renamed too. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 11:31, 2 December 2018 (UTC)

  Why do you oppose? The current names of the people from don't match either the category or article, as noted the main categories probably don't need renaming since I doubt we need separate parent categories for both village and district. Crouch, Swale (talk) 11:37, 2 December 2018 (UTC)

  The category for the smaller entity shouldn't contain people of the larger entity. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 11:43, 2 December 2018 (UTC)

  Well both the smaller and larger entity have 1 main category with the shorter names. However as noted its more common to have "people from..." categories for smaller places so we could just preform the renames and leave titles like Category:People from Gedling available for just the village. However I don't really object to moving them to Category:People from Gedling and adding Category:People by city or town in England to that CAT. Crouch, Swale (talk) 11:52, 2 December 2018 (UTC)

  I agree with Armbrust, a category for the village shouldn't contain a category for the district. Category:People from Gedling would be an elegant solution if everyone in the category is from the village of Gedling and not from other parts of the district. If that is not the case, I would recommend splitting Category:Gedling to create a separate category for the district (Category:Borough of Gedling) and then placing the "People from" category therein. If there is not enough content to justify two separate categories, then we should merge everything to the district level. -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 06:03, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

  Its normal for a settlement and administrative diversion to have a single category for (at least some levels) even if there are separate articles. Compare Rotherham/Metropolitan Borough of Rotherham which shares a single Category:Rotherham. But there are separate Category:People from the Metropolitan Borough of Rotherham and Category:People from Rotherham. As noted I would recommend creating Category:People from Gedling but I doubt we need Category:Gedling and Category:Borough of Gedling since its unlikely that there is sufficient articles to split them. Crouch, Swale (talk) 11:56, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

  Just for clarification, is discussion occurring somewhere other than this page? This section is usually for "other discussion" at locations outside of CfD. -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 06:03, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

  Moved these back to opposed section, as there is indeed no discussion some where else. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 13:09, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

On hold pending other discussion

• Category:Gannett people to Category:Gannett Company people – C2B/C2C: per Category:Gannett Company, and also because "Gannett" is highly ambiguous. -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 21:11, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

  Oppose speedy pending just-renewed discussion of what the article title should be. UnitedStatesian (talk) 23:00, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

• Category:Gannett publications to Category:Gannett Company publications – C2B: per Gannett Company/Category:Gannett Company. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 10:05, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

  Oppose speedy for same reason above. UnitedStatesian (talk) 16:01, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

  @UnitedStatesian: Without addressing your larger point about disambiguation, with which I do not necessarily agree, in this case "Gannett" is quite ambiguous, including another media company (Guy Gannett Communications). -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 21:09, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

  On hold pending RM discussion. -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 19:19, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

Moved to full discussion

• Category:Women's sports in Argentina to Category:Women's sport in Argentina (over redirect) – C2C: per Category:Sport in Argentina. -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 19:46, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
• Category:Women's sports in Barbados to Category:Women's sport in Barbados – C2C: per Category:Sport in Barbados. -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 19:46, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
• Category:Women's sports in Colombia to Category:Women's sport in Colombia – C2C: per Category:Sport in Colombia. -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 19:46, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
• Category:Women's sports in the Dominican Republic to Category:Women's sport in the Dominican Republic – C2C: per Category:Sport in the Dominican Republic. -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 19:46, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
• Category:Women's sports in Finland to Category:Women's sport in Finland – C2C: per Category:Sport in Finland. -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 19:46, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
• Category:Women's sports in Greece to Category:Women's sport in Greece (over redirect) – C2C: per Category:Sport in Greece. -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 19:46, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
• Category:Women's sports in Grenada to Category:Women's sport in Grenada – C2C: per Category:Sport in Grenada. -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 19:46, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
• Category:Women's sports in Guyana to Category:Women's sport in Guyana – C2C: per Category:Sport in Guyana. -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 19:46, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
• Category:Women's sports in Nigeria to Category:Women's sport in Nigeria – C2C: per Category:Sport in Nigeria. -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 19:46, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
• Category:Women's sports in Qatar to Category:Women's sport in Qatar (over redirect) – C2C: per Category:Sport in Qatar. -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 19:46, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
• Category:Women's sports in Saint Lucia to Category:Women's sport in Saint Lucia – C2C: per Category:Sport in Saint Lucia. -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 19:46, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
• Category:Women's sports in Sweden to Category:Women's sport in Sweden (over redirect) – C2C: per Category:Sport in Sweden. -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 19:46, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
• Category:Women's sports in Trinidad and Tobago to Category:Women's sport in Trinidad and Tobago (over redirect) – C2C: per Category:Sport in Trinidad and Tobago. -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 19:46, 2 December 2018 (UTC)

  Oppose Not objecting to the name change for this and the ones below above but I don't believe C2C applies here. The parent category is Category:Women's sports by country and grandparents are Category:Women's sports and Category:Sport by country. While most within the category use "sport" over "sports" as shown by these nominations, the number nominated here, in addition to inconsistencies with the parent categories, suggest it is not an established naming convention. Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 19:47, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

  @Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars: I, too, was ambivalent about the grandparent category being called Category:Women's sports, but 90–95% of the categories (220+ of ~230+) follow the naming of the country-specific Sport(s) in Foo parent, which does suggest an established convention. Would you kindly reevaluate your position in light of this information? Thanks, -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 05:36, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

  Yes, I see that it's about 8% which use "sports" over "sport", but 100% of the immediate categories under Category:Women's sports by continent use "sports" and Category:Women's sports in American Samoa just made it through speedy without objection, so some must think the other way is the established convention. Perhaps the distinction being made between Category:Sport by country and Category:Sports by country needs to be applied here or maybe more simply Category:Women's sports by country should be changed to Category:Women's sport by country. While the direction it should go in may be clear, I'm not sure the convention is clear enough for speedy renaming. Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 20:18, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

  Comment: Support: With country variations (as with organisation/organization and transport/transportation) I think it is within C2C to say that the main category and subcategories for a country should follow the same rule eg Category:Women's sport in Greece (not Category:Women's sports in Greece) and Category:Sport in Greece and that the manual on regional/country variations should state this. No doubt a full discussion to follow? Hugo999 (talk) 03:09, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

  @Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars and Hugo999: Moved to a full discussion. -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 23:15, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

• Category:Shaw Media newspapers to Category:Shaw Media (United States) newspapers – C2B: per Shaw Media (United States). Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 10:13, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

  Oppose speedy, seeking broader discussion. I think this may be a case where WP:IAR applies. We have Category:Amazon (company) to distinguish from the river, but once you get to subcats like Category:Amazon hardware the distinction is not necessary because logic applies. I think this one is the same and warrants an exception to C2B/C2D. UnitedStatesian (talk) 16:01, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

  @UnitedStatesian: Without addressing your larger point about disambiguation, with which I do not necessarily agree, in this case there is another media organization named Shaw Media that could lead to confusion if not disambiguated. -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 21:05, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

  @Black Falcon: Not one that is, or has ever been in the business of newspapers. UnitedStatesian (talk) 22:58, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

  Now at full discussion. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 13:02, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

• Category:McClatchy publications to Category:The McClatchy Company publications – C2B: per The McClatchy Company/Category:The McClatchy Company. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 10:07, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

  Oppose speedy for same reason above. UnitedStatesian (talk) 16:01, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

  Now at full discussion. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 13:02, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

• Category:Photometry to Category:Photometry (optics) – C2D per Photometry (optics) Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 22:03, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

  Hold on. I'm not sure I agree with this.--Srleffler (talk) 01:50, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

  Moved to a full discussion here. @Srleffler: I would be interested in hearing why you may disagree. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 02:49, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

  This is not an obvious move. The various meanings of photometry are related to one another. The category may be broader than Photometry (optics) is. I think the move at least requires some discussion; I oppose speedy.--Srleffler (talk) 07:16, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

  Now relisted at CFD 2018 Dec 16. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 18:54, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

• Category:Eastern Orthodox independent churches to Category:Independent Eastern Orthodox denominations – WP:C2C: per formula of Category:Independent Catholic denominations. Both formulera and broader, expansive terminology for the very same reasons as compared category. Chicbyaccident (talk) 22:59, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

  Oppose speedy That's just one category, not a clear convention. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 14:48, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

  Now at full discussion. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 19:44, 25 November 2018 (UTC)

• Category:People educated at Silverdale School (Sheffield) to Category:People educated at Silverdale School, Sheffield – C2B per WP:UKPLACE which is the standard format for English schools. The article is at Silverdale School but that's ambiguous (Silverdale School (disambiguation)) so can't use C2D. Crouch, Swale (talk) 11:27, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

  Oppose speedy WP:UKPLACE doesn't mention schools. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 15:06, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

  It does not specifically but this is the usual format, as can be seen from the other categories and articles. Crouch, Swale (talk) 17:29, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

  Full discussion at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2018 December 13#English schools. -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 19:40, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

• Category:People educated at Roedean School, England to Category:People educated at Roedean School, East Sussex – C2B per WP:UKPLACE, we generally use the county, not country in England, unless there is overlap in the name (Lincoln/Lincolnshire) or the place is in more than 1 county (Bures), the article is at Roedean School, but there is Roedean School (South Africa) so it can't be moved per C2D as its ambiguous. Crouch, Swale (talk) 09:55, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

  Oppose speedy WP:UKPLACE doesn't mention schools. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 15:06, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

  It doesn't mention them specifically, but deals with places in general. It specifically states "Disambiguation should not normally be to England, Wales, Scotland or Northern Ireland" this is simply because the category, but not (presumably) the article requires disambiguation. Crouch, Swale (talk) 17:29, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

  @Armbrust: Could you clarify if you withdraw you're opposition. As noted the current names are inconsistent with the usual NC. In the case of the Roedean School category either it should be disambiguated with "East Sussex" or moved to Category:People educated at Roedean School (which would need to be done at CFD due to being ambiguous). The Sheffield one should either be comma disambiguated or (similar to Roedean School be moved to the base name). Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:02, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

  @Crouch, Swale: The usual naming convention seems to be to used the main articles name. So still oppose both. Ps.: Current name chosen in this CFD. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 12:46, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

  Now at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2018 December 13#English schools. @Armbrust: sorry I missed that there was a prior CFD which means it can't use CFDS anyway similar to those I listed at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2018 September 20#Districts of England which should have been uncontroversial but had been through CFD before. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:27, 13 December 2018 (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.