Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Speedy

Categories may be listed for speedy renaming or speedy merging if they meet one or more of the criteria specified below. They must be tagged with {{subst:cfr-speedy|New name}} so that users of the categories are aware of the proposal. A request may be processed 48 hours after it was listed if there are no objections. This delay allows other editors to review the request to ensure that it meets the criteria for speedy 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}}, and no delay is required to process these. 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, 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 a page move discussion resulted in explicit consensus to rename. 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.

Admin instructions for handling listed entries

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 C2 in full CfD 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 08:32, 22 June 2024 (UTC). Currently, there are 162 open requests ().

---

Current nominations

• Category:Fictional characters who can control the weather to Category:Fictional characters with weather abilities – C2c per its siblings. Though it does somewhat overlap with Category:Fictional characters with air or wind abilities. 165.91.12.221 (talk) 06:56, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
• Category:Fictional characters who can manipulate metal to Category:Fictional characters with metal abilities – C2c per its sibling categories. 165.91.12.221 (talk) 06:49, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
• Category:Dune substances to Category:Dune materials – C2c per its parent, Category:Fictional materials, and its siblings. 165.91.12.221 (talk) 06:24, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
• Category:United States county disambiguation pages to Category:United States county name disambiguation pages – C2C: Category:Place name disambiguation pages 78.55.151.111 (talk) 00:43, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
• Category:Station disambiguation pages to Category:Station name disambiguation pages – C2C: Category:Place name disambiguation pages 78.55.151.111 (talk) 00:43, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
• Category:County-level divisions of Lijiang City to Category:County-level divisions of Lijiang – C2D: to match article title Lijiang Zanhe (talk) 18:39, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
• Category:Lijiang City to Category:Lijiang – C2D: to match article title Lijiang Zanhe (talk) 18:39, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
• Category:Scenic highways in Washington (state) to Category:Washington State Scenic and Recreational Highways – C2D: List of Washington State Scenic and Recreational Highways The Bushranger _{One ping only} 06:47, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
• Category:Scenic highways in Virginia to Category:Virginia Byways – C2D: List of Virginia Byways The Bushranger _{One ping only} 06:46, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
• Category:Scenic highways in New Mexico to Category:New Mexico Scenic and Historic Byways – C2D: List of New Mexico Scenic and Historic Byways The Bushranger _{One ping only} 06:44, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
• Category:Scenic highways in California to Category:State Scenic Highway System (California) – C2D: State Scenic Highway System (California) The Bushranger _{One ping only} 06:42, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
• Category:Scenic highways in Arkansas to Category:Arkansas Scenic Byways – C2D: Arkansas Scenic Byways. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 06:41, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
• Category:Tributaries of the White River (Arkansas) to Category:Tributaries of the White River (Arkansas–Missouri) – C2C: Following the result of this RM, and this CfD (the two being intertwined), to rename the subcat of the renamed parent category to be consistent with their results. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 11:45, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
• Category:Tributaries of the Red River (Mississippi River) to Category:Tributaries of the Red River of the South – C2C: Category:Red River of the South/C2D: Red River of the South. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 11:41, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

Opposed nominations

• Category:Canadian female actors of Pakistani descent & Category:Canadian male actors of Pakistani descent into Category:Canadian film actors of Pakistani descent - There is no real need to create two new categories to differentiate Canadian actors of Pakistani descent by their sex. One category is fine. --110.93.236.75 (talk) 22:35, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

  I fully support doing way with these quadruple intersections of nationality, sex, occupation, and descent; however, changing the scope of a category in this manner requires a full CfD and cannot be processed speedily. I'd be happy to help with the nomination if needed, but we also need to consider whether these two categories are any different from others in Category:Actresses of Asian descent and Category:Male actors of Asian descent. -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 06:01, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

  Sure. --110.93.236.75 (talk) 11:54, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

  Sorry, I'm not sure what you mean. You'd like my help in nominating it, or you agree that we "need to consider whether these two categories are any different from others in Category:Actresses of Asian descent and Category:Male actors of Asian descent"? -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 03:25, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

I guess they're not really that different from the other similar categories. I guess maybe just leave them be as they are then? I don't know. I just thought there was no particular need to have so many categories based on so many particular qualities like sex. --110.93.236.75 (talk) 07:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

• Category:People educated at St Ignatius' College, Enfield to Category:People educated at St Ignatius' College – C2C: per St Ignatius' College. HandsomeFella (talk) 20:13, 23 November 2017 (UTC)

  Oppose speedy - While the college in Enfield is the primary usage, St Ignatius College is ambiguous, so at a minimum this should be taken to a full CfD. In any case, speedy does not apply—I think you meant C2D, not C2C, but still this is not a topic category. -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 23:06, 23 November 2017 (UTC)

• Category:Decatur, Alabama metropolitan area to Category:Decatur metropolitan area, Alabama – C2D: In which I cringe because this format is terrible to my eye, but technically correct and RfC-conforming. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 20:39, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Category:Dothan, Alabama metropolitan area to Category:Dothan metropolitan area, Alabama

    Oppose, the article name is not in line with overall enWP practice. It is Washington County not Washington County. The type name should be capitalized. Was only moved Jan 2017: "02:13, 29 January 2017‎ JamesLucas (talk | contribs)‎ m . . (9,267 bytes) (0)‎ . . (JamesLucas moved page Decatur, Alabama Metropolitan Area to Decatur metropolitan area, Alabama: as per 2013 consensus)". The consensus is flawed and didn't address capitalization properly. The article intro has it in accordance with current enWP practice since article creation [1] 80.171.239.124 (talk) 05:35, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

    This objection belongs to a globally banned user. If nobody else objects, we can process (after some reasonable waiting period).--Ymblanter (talk) 08:15, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

    Oppose speedy The main article has been moved to Decatur Metropolitan Area, Alabama, so the article name(s) are not stable. -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 19:31, 23 November 2017 (UTC)

On hold pending other discussion

• None currently

Moved to full discussion

• Category:National parks of Greenland to Category:National parks in Greenland – C2C: per subnational subcategories of Category:National parks, which use "in". The Bushranger _{One ping only} 06:31, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

  Oppose speedy: Greenland is a constituent country of Denmark, so I am not sure it should follow the "in" convention of subnational entities (e.g. provinces, states). I am not certain that "of" is necessarily more appropriate in this case, but this should have a full discussion. -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 06:25, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

  @Black Falcon: I considered that, but the description on Northeast Greenland National Park that "It was the first national park to be created in the Kingdom of Denmark" (emphasis mine) was what convinced me. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 07:00, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

  Now at full CFD. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 11:52, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

• Category:Articles containing Pushto-language text to Category:Articles containing Pashto-language text – C2D, Pashto language; C2C, Category:Pashto and all other subcategories thereof. Warning: The {{lang}} and {{lang-ps}} back-end bits that handle the ps, pus, pst, pbu, pbt, wne, pash1269, and/or 58-ABD-a language codes will need updating to use the correct category name. A bunch of this stuff is in the process of migrating to Lua; pinging Trappist the monk, who knows better than anyone else how to update it for such a change.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ >^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ<  08:58, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

  I'm about to jump on a plane to Elsewhere so have no time to think about this. You might want to make mention of this discussion at Template talk:Lang so that other editors there know about it and so that I will remember that this discussion exists.—Trappist the monk (talk) 11:34, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

  I added a note at Template talk:Lang#Category:Articles containing Pushto-language text. -- Black Falcon ^(talk) —Preceding undated comment added 19:25, 23 November 2017‎ (UTC)

• Meanwhile it has been brought to CfD, see here. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:35, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

• Category:People from Victoria, British Columbia by occupation to Category:People from Victoria, British Columbia, by occupation – C2A: Two-part location-name categories missing a comma per WP:Copyedit#Punctuation. HandsomeFella (talk) 16:08, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Category:People from Halifax, Nova Scotia by occupation to Category:People from Halifax, Nova Scotia, by occupation
  • Category:People from Hamilton, Ontario by occupation to Category:People from Hamilton, Ontario, by occupation
  • Category:People from London, Ontario by occupation to Category:People from London, Ontario, by occupation
  • Category:People from Windsor, Ontario by occupation to Category:People from Windsor, Ontario, by occupation
  • Category:People from Albany, New York by occupation to Category:People from Albany, New York, by occupation
  • Category:People from Buffalo, New York by occupation to Category:People from Buffalo, New York, by occupation
  • Category:People from Dayton, Ohio by occupation to Category:People from Dayton, Ohio, by occupation
  • Category:People from Jonesboro, Arkansas by occupation to Category:People from Jonesboro, Arkansas, by occupation
  • Category:People from Little Rock, Arkansas by occupation to Category:People from Little Rock, Arkansas, by occupation
  • Category:People from North Little Rock, Arkansas by occupation to Category:People from North Little Rock, Arkansas, by occupation
  • Category:People from Pine Bluff, Arkansas by occupation to Category:People from Pine Bluff, Arkansas, by occupation
  • Category:People from Spokane, Washington by occupation to Category:People from Spokane, Washington, by occupation
  • Category:People from Tulsa, Oklahoma by occupation to Category:People from Tulsa, Oklahoma, by occupation

    Oppose all speedy location rename. I don't like the the extra comma. 2001:569:74EF:BD00:C5DB:BC3E:974F:E670 (talk) 02:56, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

    Haha, WP:IDONTLIKEIT is not a valid reason. HandsomeFella (talk) 08:46, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

    It's obvious that this IP's objection doesn't count. If no valid objections arise, maybe we can process this as unopposed after the regular 48 hours. HandsomeFella (talk) 13:14, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

    No, do not process it, take it for a full CFD. 2001:569:74EF:BD00:58D7:8DE3:356D:407D (talk) 20:52, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

    If you have a valid reason to object this renaming proposal, by all means don't hold back until there's a CFD. Now that you've had two chances to explain, you might miss out on that opportunity. Not liking it does not count as a valid reason. HandsomeFella (talk) 21:13, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

    The valid reason the is "adding a second comma for it's location would ruin the sentence" for the "by occupation" sentence. Could you still take that proposal to the full CFD? Also User:Bearcat will decide to support speedy or oppose speedy rename for the proposal on the extra comma. 2001:569:74EF:BD00:45E0:D560:2C77:BA57 (talk) 01:38, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

    Have you read WP:Copyedit#Punctuation? And yes, I saw that you WP:CANVASSed Bearcat. HandsomeFella (talk) 06:06, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

    I don't want to read the Copyedit for punctuation guidelines for "by occupation" categories. You don't need the extra comma for the "by occupation" categories. Adding the city-province next to the comma and "by occupation" categories would ruin the sentence. 2001:569:74EF:BD00:45E0:D560:2C77:BA57 (talk) 07:03, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

    No, it wouldn't. On the contrary, without the comma, the "by occupation" part would seem to be related to [State] only:

    1) People from Tulsa

    2) Oklahoma by occupation

    Considering this goes against the manual of style, and the most other such categories include the comma (see the parent categories), don't hold your breath. HandsomeFella (talk) 07:12, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

    No, that's not true, don't you see all categories for the "by occupation" title would have been used as "Category:People from Tulsa, Oklahoma by occupation". the comma only used "once" between the city and province or state. The "by occupations" stays perfect without the second comma next to the by occupation. 2001:569:74EF:BD00:45E0:D560:2C77:BA57 (talk) 07:24, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

    See Category:American people by city and occupation. Most two-part names are followed by the comma. Those that aren't are included in this discussion. And that's still contravening WP:Copyedit#Punctuation. HandsomeFella (talk) 08:26, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

    I'm going to postulate that that "by the contrary" fails WP:COMMONSENSE. Any reasonable person won't read it as two seperate things. I'm not going to object simply on the grounds of I know a losing battle when I see one, but seriously this perincious picayuneness on "but *grammar*", especially in categories, is just another thing for people to point and laugh at Wikipedia about. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 08:30, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

    Actually, I have seen a trend in media – online and on paper – towards adding the second comma. So I guess people will have more to laugh at. HandsomeFella (talk) 10:46, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

    Moved to a full discussion. -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 18:37, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

• Category:Roman Limes to Category:Roman limes - C2A Laurel Lodged (talk) 11:05, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Category:Roman Limes in Ukraine to Category:Roman limes in Ukraine - C2A Laurel Lodged (talk) 11:01, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Category:Roman Limes in Tunisia to Category:Roman limes in Tunisia over re-direct per C2A Laurel Lodged (talk) 10:58, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Category:Roman Limes in Syria to Category:Roman limes in Syria - C2A Laurel Lodged (talk) 10:54, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Category:Roman Limes in Scotland to Category:Roman limes in Scotland - C2A Laurel Lodged (talk) 10:52, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Category:Roman Limes in Slovakia to Category:Roman limes in Slovakia - C2A Laurel Lodged (talk) 10:49, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Category:Roman Limes in Serbia to Category:Roman limes in Serbia - C2A Laurel Lodged (talk) 10:47, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Category:Roman Limes in Romania to Category:Roman limes in Romania - C2A Laurel Lodged (talk) 10:45, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Category:Roman Limes in Netherlands to Category:Roman limes in the Netherlands - C2A Laurel Lodged (talk) 10:43, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Category:Roman Limes in Libya to Category:Roman limes in Libya - C2A Laurel Lodged (talk) 10:41, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Category:Roman Limes in Germany to Category:Roman limes in Germany – C2A Laurel Lodged (talk) 18:57, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Category:Roman Limes in France to Category:Roman limes in France – C2A Laurel Lodged (talk) 18:55, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Category:Roman Limes in England to Category:Roman limes in England – C2A Laurel Lodged (talk) 18:53, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

    Oppose this set. @Laurel Lodged: C2D per what? Roman Limes and Roman limes both redirect to Limes, so that doesn't help. The head category and most sibling categories use Roman Limes, so these nominations go against C2C. – Fayenatic London 07:40, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

    Reply Was a typo - should be C2A to correct a typo. Limes should not be capitalised. Laurel Lodged (talk) 09:15, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

    @Laurel Lodged and Fayenatic london: We may also rename them to Category:Limes, Category:Limes in Ukraine etc. per WP:C2D, how do you feel about that? Marcocapelle (talk) 12:39, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

    I would prefer that these speedies go ahead. Later, I think that the entire scheme of Roman Walls, Roman Limes and Roman Fortified Roads needs to be re-visited. To that end, I've started a discussion at Talk:Limes#Walls_vs_Limes. Laurel Lodged (talk) 12:42, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

    I don't see any point having a speedy renaming, particularly one that goes against C2C, while a wider discussion is under way. Also, "Limes" is singular; the categories should use a plural noun, and the choice deserves a full discussion e.g. "Roman Limites", "Roman limites", "Roman frontiers", "Roman fortified boundaries".

    In reply to Marcocapelle's suggestion to drop "Roman", that is not desirable because there are medieval Limites e.g. Limes Saxoniae. – Fayenatic London 13:16, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

    Agree with Fayenatic london, why bother now while a discussion is still ongoing. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:03, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

    Support with Roman limites, not limes (with or without Roman), and no with a a capital L. The capitalization of Limes in these constructions is wrong (and would be wrong as Limites). Dropping the Roman would be grossly ambiguous with limes, especially in category space where we use plurals; about 99.9% of readers would think they were about fruit if they were in the form "Limes in Tunisia". The plural rule means use limites, anyway. We could use just "Limites in Tunisia", etc., but it's not likely to be meaningful to the average reader and may just look like a typo. Roman limites will tell all but the bonehead that it's a Latin word. I've looked at the RfC opened at Talk:Limes and it's just a bunch of rambling with no indication of going toward a consensus. If we need to change it later to Roman frontiers or whatever, then fine, we can do so. No reason to have incorrectly singular and capitalize categories in the interim.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ >^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ<  17:06, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

    I think that makes sense. Pinging User:Fayenatic london, User:Laurel Lodged and User:Marcocapelle for thoughts. -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 00:37, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

    It's a sensible interim measure. Laurel Lodged (talk) 09:33, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

    • I'm not convinced that it's in the right direction. I would prefer to see a full discussion. It seems to me that this may be a case of over-categorisation by WP:SHAREDNAME. Why do we need a hierarchy using a foreign word, when we already have Category:Roman frontiers and Category:Roman fortifications? – Fayenatic London 09:58, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

      I have no objection to that objection. Given the amount of discussion above, this should just go to a full discussion instead of languishing in the holding tank.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ >^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ<  08:04, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

    I started a discussion to rename the top-level category here and to upmerge the subcategories here. -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 18:15, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

• Category:Track and field athletes from Louisiana to Category:Track and field people from Louisiana per C2C. My proposal is to speedily merge or rename these categories from "athletes" to "people" for these four states, as the subcategories for 17 of the 21 states use "people", see Category:American track and field athletes by state or territory However if it was thought that using "athletes" rather than "people" for all 21 states would fit better with the overall "track and field athletes" categories, I would go along with that. Hugo999 (talk) 04:56, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
  • Category:Track and field athletes from Pennsylvania to Category:Track and field people from Pennsylvania
  • Category:Track and field athletes from West Virginia to Category:Track and field people from West Virginia
  • Category:Track and field athletes from Wyoming to Category:Track and field people from Wyoming

    @Hugo999: Thanks for the note. I am declining speedy as "people" can mean coaches or other sportspeople and athletes are the performers in sports. This is consistent with several schemes. I'll be happy to make my case at a full CfD. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 05:09, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

    Comment Yes but which way - I am happy to put up for full discussion for going to "athletes" for the 17 states if that is favoured, in line with the parent category Hugo999 (talk) 21:58, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

    @Hugo999: Sorry if I was unclear. The parent category is Sport people with child categories as appropriate (Sport players/coaches/etc.) For most sports, it's not necessary to have more than coaches and players and for many, only players. Does that clarify? ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:11, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

    AS I favour "athletes" rather than "people" now so will put that case up at a full discussion. Hugo999 (talk) 21:59, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

    Now relisted at CFD 2017-10-10. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 02:35, 13 October 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.