Jump to content

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Speedy: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
→‎Current requests: Hard Rock Hotel and Casino (Las Vegas)
→‎Current requests: Grand Street (Manhattan)
Line 101: Line 101:
<!-- 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:Grand Street (New York City)]] to [[:Category:Grand Street (Manhattan)]] – C2D per [[Grand Street (Manhattan)]] [[User:Good Olfactory|Good Ol’factory]] <sup>[[User talk:Good Olfactory|(talk)]]</sup> 00:54, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
* [[:Category:Albums recorded at the Hard Rock Hotel & Casino (Las Vegas)]] to [[:Category:Albums recorded at the Hard Rock Hotel and Casino (Las Vegas)]] – C2D per {{Cat|Hard Rock Hotel and Casino (Las Vegas)}}/[[Hard Rock Hotel and Casino (Las Vegas)]] [[User:Good Olfactory|Good Ol’factory]] <sup>[[User talk:Good Olfactory|(talk)]]</sup> 00:46, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
* [[:Category:Albums recorded at the Hard Rock Hotel & Casino (Las Vegas)]] to [[:Category:Albums recorded at the Hard Rock Hotel and Casino (Las Vegas)]] – C2D per {{Cat|Hard Rock Hotel and Casino (Las Vegas)}}/[[Hard Rock Hotel and Casino (Las Vegas)]] [[User:Good Olfactory|Good Ol’factory]] <sup>[[User talk:Good Olfactory|(talk)]]</sup> 00:46, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
* [[:Category:Pretty Little Liars]] to [[:Category:Pretty Little Liars (franchise)]] – C2D. [[User:Gonnym|Gonnym]] ([[User talk:Gonnym|talk]]) 23:13, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
* [[:Category:Pretty Little Liars]] to [[:Category:Pretty Little Liars (franchise)]] – C2D. [[User:Gonnym|Gonnym]] ([[User talk:Gonnym|talk]]) 23:13, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

Revision as of 00:54, 15 September 2020

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.

To oppose a speedy request you must record your objection within 48 hours of the nomination. Do this by inserting immediately under the nomination:

  • Oppose, (the reasons for your objection). ~~~~

You will not be able to do this by editing the page WP:Categories for discussion. Instead you should edit the section WP:Categories for discussion#Add requests for speedy renaming and merging here or the page WP:Categories for discussion/Speedy#Add requests for speedy renaming and merging here (WP:CFDS). Be aware that in the course of any discussion, the nomination and its discussion may get moved further down the page purely for organizational convenience – you may need to search WP:CFDS to find the new location. Participate in any ongoing discussion but, unless you withdraw your opposition, a knowledgeable person may eventually bring forward the nomination and discussion to become a regular CFD discussion. At that stage you may add further comments but your initial opposition will still be considered. However, if after seven days there has been no support for the request, and no response from the nominator, the request may be dropped from further consideration as a speedy.

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 revive the process, this may be requested at WP:Categories for discussion (CfD) in accordance with its instructions.

If you belatedly notice and want to oppose a speedy move that has already been processed, contact one of the admins who process the Speedy page. If your objection seems valid, they may reverse the move, or start a full CFD discussion.

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).
  • Correction of obvious grammatical errors, such as a missing conjunction (e.g. Individual frogs toads → Individual frogs and toads). This does not include changing the plurality of a noun when such the distinction between topic and set categories is uncertain.

C2B: Consistency with established Wikipedia naming conventions and practices

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 (so it generally does not apply to proposals to remove a disambiguator from the category name, even when the main article is the primary topic of its name, i.e. it does not contain a disambiguator); 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). C2D does not apply if there is any ongoing discussion about the name of the page or category, or there has been a recent discussion concerning any of the pages that resulted in a no consensus result, or it is controversial in some other way.
  • This criterion may also be used to rename a set category in the same circumstances, where the set is defined by a renamed topic; e.g. players for a sports team, or places in a district.
  • This criterion is also used to add a disambiguator to a category name, even when the main article is not the primary topic of its name, but no other topics are likely to have an eponymous category

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.

C2F: One eponymous article

  • This criterion applies if the category contains only an eponymous article or media file, provided that the category has not otherwise been emptied shortly before the nomination. The default outcome is an upmerge to the parent categories, where applicable. Nominations should use {{subst:cfm-speedy}} (speedy merger) linking to a suitable parent category, or to another appropriate category (e.g. one that is currently on the article).

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 is no opposition to the listing; if there is a discussion, check if the opposing user(s) ended up withdrawing their opposition.

If the listing meets these criteria, simply have the category renamed or merged – follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Administrator instructions, in the section "If the decision is to Rename, Merge, or Delete"; 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 ~~~~

(The four ~ will sign and datestamp the entry automatically.) If the current name should be redirected rather than deleted, use:

*REDIRECT [[:Category:old name]] to [[:Category:new name]] – Reason ~~~~

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 02:50, 19 June 2024 (UTC). Currently, there are 71 open requests (refresh).


Current requests

Opposed requests

 – TSventon (talk) 10:20, 12 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

On hold pending other discussion

  • Category:North Macedonian politicians to Category:Macedonian politicians. - WP:C2B. There's a naming convention in place which clearly establishes 'Macedonian' as the term for nationality. The policy was based on a wide consensus established by a RfC. A recent local consensus - [7] was obviously not aware of this and changed the name of the category. --FlavrSavr (talk) 16:45, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Oppose speedy @FlavrSavr: firstly, the category was moved through full CfD discussion, which closed today, so you could contact the closer and ask them to reconsider their close. Secondly Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Macedonia) says "Article names, categories, and templates should avoid adjectival use altogether. The use of neutral formulations such as "of North Macedonia", "in North Macedonia," etc. is preferred", which suggests a move to Category:Politicians of North Macedonia. Category:North Macedonian politicians by party should be nominated as well. Also, the category has not been tagged for speedy renaming. TSventon (talk) 17:59, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    @TSventon: Thanks. So I should contact bibliomaniac15? BTW, that particular sentence has been hotly contested even post formulation of the policy. The 'nationality' part wasn't. --FlavrSavr (talk) 18:05, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    @FlavrSavr: yes, see the lead of Wikipedia:Categories for discussion. I would suggest that the discussions should have considered WP:NCMAC, but it seems that they didn't. TSventon (talk) 18:45, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    @TSventon: That's really helpful, thanks. For the sake of formality I did tag the category as CFDS after your comment, but this will probably warrant re-opening the discussion or a new full CfD. I do agree that WP:NCMAC should be the basis of the discussed move. --FlavrSavr (talk) 18:53, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    @FlavrSavr: it is correct to tag the category: the tag will be removed when the speedy process is concluded. The nomination can be moved to the "Moved to full discussion" section if a full discussion is (re)started and the category will also need a full CfD tag. TSventon (talk) 19:16, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    The CFD decision seems perverse. The category tree is Category:Macedonian people, and this seems to be the only exception to the "Macdenian fooers" convention of its subcats. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 00:03, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Agreed. While WP:NCMAC tried very hard to address the somewhat mixed results of the RfC on the adjectival usage of the country, it is pretty specific about the people (namely: nationality) of that country. I'm surprised that somebody actually brought the issue up, let alone managed to successfully go through a full CFD decision. Let's see what the move review will bring about. --FlavrSavr (talk) 00:36, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Moved to full discussion

Please read the consensus in WP:Footy before making nosense oppose or comment topic that you did not familiar. It is the same team and we don't subcat player for the same team that just renaming. The team has only one article. Not two or a few. Matthew hk (talk) 22:13, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Category:Peacebuilding would not work here because it's an "-ing" word - it's about more synthetic (WP:RS) overviews of processes, not about particular concrete elements of them. The present elements of Category:Peacebuilding are wider topics than individual mechanisms. Many of the specific elements (mechanisms) are components both to solve existing conflicts and to prevent conflicts from occurring or recurring: e.g. arms embargoes and confidence-building measures. "War ending" is also an -ing expression, with the same problem. I don't see an objection in principle of having two sub-categories of Category:peace mechanism or Category:peace mechanisms, but it seems a bit premature to me, and I think the focus on individual things/pieces - mechanisms - will reduce the number of fuzzy categorisations. Better wait until we have more contributions/contributors before sub-categorising. Boud (talk) 20:35, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Marcocapelle: "Vetus Latina" is definetly more precise than "Old Latin". Those articles relate to manuscripts of the Vetus Latina, not any Latin manuscripts of old times. Veverve (talk) 20:10, 25 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Marcocapelle: "Vetus Latina" designates the translations made from the Septuagint and the New Testament into Latin, mainly before the 4th century; see its article. The Vulgate is the 4th-century translations in Latin of the Hebrew Old Testament, the New Testament, and of some books from the Septuagint; those translations were mainly done by Jerome. Therefore, it is needed to distinguish between the Vetus Latina (a specific set of translations), the Vulgate (another set of specific translations), and other Latin manuscripts, and this is one of the the purposes of my renaming proposal. Veverve (talk) 23:47, 25 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • The distinction with Vulgate will still exist with Vulgate as a subcat of Latin. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:19, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I add that the category is currently called "Old Latin" because "Old Latin" translates "Vetus Latina". You can check for yourself: all the manuscripts within this category are Vetus Latina texts. Veverve (talk) 23:59, 25 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Marcocapelle: the confusion also stems from the fact "Vetus Latina" is the common name for those translations, whereas "Old Latin" is condusing. Moreover, there would be no point in putting all the Vetus Latin New Testament manuscript in a new, broader, less precise category. Veverve (talk) 11:33, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  1. purge this category of show that are not series
  2. rename all the other subcats of Category:Television series by country and genre to use "shows".
But I don't see the case for making British programming an exception. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 10:53, 5 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
There shouldn't be an exception for Britain. However, articles properly categorised as programmes/programs/shows (in any country) shouldn't be improperly re-categorised as series. Another (hypothetical) suggestion: remove Category:British television programmes by genre from Category:Television series by country and genre which is, I think, the source of the problem. I now see Category:Television shows is (temporarily?) chaotic. Thincat (talk) 11:13, 5 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Thincat, excluding Brits shows from Category:Television series by country and genre is no solution. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 11:21, 5 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Your option (1) would involve a great deal of work. Some subcats contain mostly one-offs (Category:British television documentaries) other subcats contain mostly series (or entirely if the subcat naming is correct). (2) would seem to me preferable but not as a speedy because the situation has not been clear. Thincat (talk) 08:54, 7 July 2020 (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.