Jump to content

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Speedy: Difference between revisions

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Line 37: Line 37:
<!-- PLEASE DON'T CHANGE THE FOLLOWING LINE, AS IT BREAKS TWINKLE CFDS MODULE -->
<!-- PLEASE DON'T CHANGE THE FOLLOWING LINE, AS IT BREAKS TWINKLE 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:Anosy]] to [[:Category:Anosy Region]] – C2D per [[Anosy Region]]. [[User:Tassedethe|Tassedethe]] ([[User talk:Tassedethe|talk]]) 17:41, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
** [[:Category:People from Anosy]] to [[:Category:People from Anosy Region]]
* [[:Category:People from Anhalt]] to [[:Category:People from the Duchy of Anhalt]] – C2D per [[Duchy of Anhalt]]. [[User:Tassedethe|Tassedethe]] ([[User talk:Tassedethe|talk]]) 17:34, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
* [[:Category:People from Anhalt]] to [[:Category:People from the Duchy of Anhalt]] – C2D per [[Duchy of Anhalt]]. [[User:Tassedethe|Tassedethe]] ([[User talk:Tassedethe|talk]]) 17:34, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
* [[:Category:People from Anderton]] to [[:Category:People from Anderton, Lancashire]] – C2D per [[Anderton, Lancashire]]. [[User:Tassedethe|Tassedethe]] ([[User talk:Tassedethe|talk]]) 17:32, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
* [[:Category:People from Anderton]] to [[:Category:People from Anderton, Lancashire]] – C2D per [[Anderton, Lancashire]]. [[User:Tassedethe|Tassedethe]] ([[User talk:Tassedethe|talk]]) 17:32, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

Revision as of 17:41, 18 May 2013

Shortcut

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

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

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

Speedy criteria

The category-specific criteria for speedy deletion, renaming, or merging are strictly limited to: From 20 November 2009 to 4 December 2013 the policy page Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion transcluded the criteria for deletion of categories from a discussion page instead of having them directly coded in the policy page. To see the history of that section of the speedy deletion policy during that period, see the editing history of Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Speedy/Criteria. For current discussion page for the same material see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Speedy#Speedy criteria.

A nomination to merge or rename, brought forward as a full CfD, may be speedily closed if the closing administrator is satisfied that:
  • The nomination clearly falls within the scope of one of the criteria listed above, and;
  • No objections have been made within 48 hours of the initial nomination.
If both these conditions are satisfied, the closure will be regarded as having been as a result of a speedy nomination. If any objections have been raised then the CfD nomination will remain in place for the usual 7-day discussion period, to be decided in accordance with expressed consensus.

Add requests for speedy renaming here

Current nominations

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

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

Use the following format:

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

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

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

A request may be completed if it is more than 48 hours old; that is, the time stamp shown is 14:58, 26 August 2024 (UTC) (Purge) or earlier.

Opposed nominations

  • Category:Quebec sovereignists to Category:Quebec sovereigntists – C2A (spelling; the existing word is not found in any good dictionaries) Chris the speller yack 17:24, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Objection: The Canadian Oxford most certainly counts as a "good dictionary", and it lists sovereignist as the primary spelling, with sovereigntist as an "also" variation. This might very well be a distinct Canadianism, influenced by daily contact with a co-national language in which the word is souverainiste, but per WP:UE Canadian spelling applies to a specifically Canadian-related category regardless of how the word might be spelled elsewhere. There's a valid case to be made that we should pick one spelling and stick with it, rather than mixing both spellings as randomly as articles about the Quebec sovereignty movement currently do, but that's going to require an extended consensus discussion and not a C2A speedy. Bearcat (talk) 06:30, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Contesting. While some sources still prescribe capitalization of internet as a proper noun, it's become sufficiently genericized that this is unnecessary. Per MOS:CAPS, we should not capitalize when in doubt. See also Capitalization of "Internet". --BDD (talk) 17:51, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
On hold pending other discussion
  • None currently
Moved to full discussion
I have to oppose the first since it is under a full discussion since March 27, Albeit incorrectly listed. Vegaswikian (talk) 19:14, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
And never tagged? No wonder it's not been noticed. Timrollpickering (talk) 20:55, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose speedy these cannot simply be renamed, several of the articles in these heirarchies have nothing to do with Taiwan, as they occur during the period of Japanese rule of Taiwan, or during the period of ROC rule of the mainland. These need to be split -- 65.94.76.126 (talk) 04:10, 1 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Please specify which articles. Most only contain the relations main articles and bits from the modern era. We get similar objections on just about every naming discussion relating to Taiwan - a bit of IDHT? Timrollpickering (talk) 17:49, 1 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Take to full CFD - the proposed target is a poor one. In reality, all the members of the cat and subcats seem to be boulevards rather than avenues, but of course they tend to get named "Avenue of the ..." and suchlike. Category:Boulevards is probably the best rename. As the creator, I only called it cat:Avenues as that is what all the pre-existing subcats were called.--Mais oui! (talk) 06:11, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Then isn't this just categorization by shared name? Good Ol’factory (talk) 23:29, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
To compound the confusion, in some countries boulevards are called avenues. Grutness...wha? 00:12, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It seems to me that we shouldn't be categorizing by street name at all. Given how loosely the terms and used in a variety of countries, do we really want to separately categorize avenues, streets, lanes, drives, crescents, courts, boulevards, parkways, places, etc.? Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:28, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree. Designing and constructing a Boulevard is a major political/urban planning act, often involving the destruction of vast areas of pre-existing urban areas (eg. Paris). The great boulevard construction phases of Paris, Vienna, Berlin, Munich etc easily rank as significant building and structure projects, comparable with the money and fuss allocated to modern high speed railway lines, Olympic parks or major sport arena schemes. In fact, one could argue that the big boulevards are some of the most significant building and structure events of all-time: Paris and Vienna were transformed beyond all recognition, and will remain so for centuries, perhaps forever. What football stadium can one say that about? cf. another major urban planning feature which we categorize: Category:Town squares. I suspect that this topic has been thus-far neglected because it is not a major aspect of urban development in English-speaking countries. But Wikipedia is a global project and we must actively counter the more tabloid tendencies, like the grave skewing of content to big-up English speakers' obsessions, and often completely ignore or sideline major non-English-language topics. --Mais oui! (talk) 03:57, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The problem is that not every country uses "boulevard" or "avenue" in the same way. My position is not ignoring a non-English-language topic, it's recognising that there are differences across all countries. Good Ol’factory (talk) 05:47, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
So what? Wikipedia's role is to document the real world, not to try to pigeon-hole anything and everything into a neat set of made up in-house rules. The real world is a complex (and thus fascinating) place, and we must strive to accurately represent it. I despair sometimes at Wikipedia's tedious tendency to ... (3 year old son insists that daddy shuts the computer now, but you get the drift of my tirade...) --Mais oui! (talk) 05:57, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia's role is to document the real world, not to try to pigeon-hole anything and everything into a neat set of made up in-house rules. Exactly. That's why having a category called Category:Avenues would be inappropriate. Good Ol’factory (talk) 02:46, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Err, are you deliberately trying to misrepresent what I am saying. I do not, and have never wanted, a category tree based on "avenues". I want one based on the great, mainland European urban planning feature, the boulevard. As is perfectly obvious to any well-intentioned human being who actually reads what I have written. --Mais oui! (talk) 04:22, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Please remember to assume good faith. Thanks. - The Bushranger One ping only 05:14, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You created Category:Avenues, Mais oui!, so your intent is not crystal clear when compared with your statements above. I understand your stated position above, but there could be a variety of reasons a user creates Category:Avenues, and moreover other users are likely to populate it for a variety of reasons—including the fact that a street is called "XXX Avenue". Just because you know what the category is for doesn't mean all users do or will, especially when there is no category definition. Good Ol’factory (talk) 06:14, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This is at a full discussion. Good Ol’factory (talk) 06:19, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Speedy&oldid=555675320"