Deletion discussions |
---|
|
Articles |
Templates |
Files |
Possibly unfree files (PUF) |
Categories |
Redirects |
Miscellany |
Speedy deletion |
Proposed deletion |
Categories for discussion (CfD) is where the renaming, merging or deletion of categories – i.e. pages in the Category namespace – is discussed and action decided. Stub types templates are also discussed here.
Categories are used to organize pages and aid the browsing of related articles. For instructions as to how to use this page, perform cleanup maintenance or request speedy deletions or renamings, see "How to use CfD" below. The policies meant to guide category renaming may be found at Wikipedia:Naming conventions (categories).
Unless a change to a category is non-controversial – e.g. prompted by vandalism or duplication – please do not amend or remove the category from pages before a decision has been made.
Categories that have been listed for more than seven days are eligible for deletion, renaming or merging when a rough consensus to do so has been reached or no objections to the nomination have been raised.
When a category is renamed or merged with another category, it is usually helpful to leave an instance of the {{Category redirect|...}} template on the category's former page. See "Redirecting categories" below for more information.
Contents
Scope
CfD is only intended for discussions where an editor already has a clear action proposal in mind. For general brainstorming on how to improve the category system, good places for discussion include Wikipedia talk:Categorization, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Categories, and the talk pages of any WikiProjects relevant to the content covered by the categories in question.
Current discussions
Discussions awaiting closure
- Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2016 April 2
- Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2016 April 1
- Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2016 March 31
- Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2016 March 30
- Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2016 March 29 (5 open)
- Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2016 March 28 (5 open)
- Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2016 March 26 (6 open)
- Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2016 March 25 (3 open)
- Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2016 March 24 (2 open)
- Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2016 March 23 (5 open)
- Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2016 March 22 (3 open)
- Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2016 March 21 (5 open)
- Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2016 March 20 (6 open)
- Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2016 March 19 (2 open)
- Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2016 March 18 (6 open)
- Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2016 March 17 (3 open)
- Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2016 March 16 (9 open)
- Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2016 March 15 (2 open)
- Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2016 March 14 (5 open)
- Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2016 March 13 (2 open)
- Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2016 March 12 (5 open)
- Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2016 March 11 (2 open)
- Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2016 March 9 (3 open)
- Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2016 March 7 (2 open)
- Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2016 March 6 (3 open)
- Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2016 March 5 (1 open – Palestinian Christian monks)
- Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2016 March 4 (5 open)
- Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2016 March 3 (1 open – Sports tactics)
- Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2016 March 2 (1 open – Bessarabian Romanians)
- Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2016 March 1 (3 open)
- Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2016 February 27 (4 open)
- Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2016 February 24 (5 open)
- Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2016 February 23 (1 open - United States church state separation case law)
- Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2016 February 19 (2 open)
- Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2016 February 18 (1 open - Concept automobiles)
- Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2016 February 17 (2 open)
- Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2016 February 14 (3 open)
- Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2016 February 13 (3 open)
- Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2016 February 12 (2 open)
- Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2016 February 11 (2 open)
- Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2016 February 6 (1 open – Colonial period in Yemen)
- Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2016 February 3 (1 open – Plymouth, Devon)
- Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2016 February 1 (2 open – Avenues, Fireworks festivals)
- Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2016 January 29 (3 open – Astro Boy video games, Sports festivals, and Estab in Czechoslovakia by century)
- Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2016 January 15 (2 open – Regional writers, Organisations in UK by membership)
- Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2016 January 10 (1 open – Small Carnolian categories)
How to use CfD
Procedure
To list a category manually for deletion, merging or renaming, follow this process:
I |
Preliminary steps.
Determine whether the category needs deleting, merging, or renaming.
|
II |
Edit the category.
Add one of the following tags at the beginning of the category text of every category to be discussed. (The tags belong on the categories' main pages rather than their talk/discussion pages.)
|
III |
Create the CFD section.
Follow the instructions in the comments (visible during edit), to copy and paste the template shown. All categories are specified without the
|
Once you have previewed your entry, please make sure to add your signature after your proposal. If nominating a list of entries as a batch mentioned after your rationale, it is somewhat neater to place these after the signature (rather than leave the signature dangling at the end of the list, apparently unrelated to your reasons).
Once you have submitted a category here, no further action is necessary on your part. If the nomination is supported, helpful administrators and editors will log the result and ensure that the change is implemented to all affected pages.
Also, consider adding to your watchlist any categories you nominate. This will help ensure that your nomination tag is not mistakenly or deliberately removed.
Twinkle
The use of Wikipedia:Twinkle greatly facilitates CfD nominations. To install Twinkle, go to "my preferences", the "Gadgets" tab, the "Browsing" section and check "Twinkle ...". Use the now-installed "XfD" (Nominate for deletion) tab while viewing the page to be deleted or renamed.
Users without accounts and users with new accounts
Users without accounts (unregistered users) may nominate and comment on proceedings, just as in Articles for Deletion (AfD).
Redirecting categories
It is our general policy to delete categories that do not have articles in them. (Rationale: Unlike articles, categories are mostly for internal use only. If they don't have any articles, they shouldn't have any links from any articles or any other categories, because they are not useful for navigation and sorting.)
However, some categories frequently have articles assigned to them accidentally, or are otherwise re-created over and over. But categories cannot be redirected using "hard" redirects: #REDIRECT[[target]]. (See Wikipedia:Redirect#category for the technical details.)
Instead, we use a form of "soft redirects" to solve the issue. You can "create" a category redirect by adding {{Category redirect|target}}
to the category page. Bots patrol these categories and move articles into the "redirect" targets. Notice that it's not a redirect at all as a wiki page; it's bots that virtually make them redirects.
In particular, we set up category redirects at the former category name when we convert hyphens into en dashes or vice versa (e.g. Category:Canada-Russia relations → Category:Canada–Russia relations). It is also helpful to set up redirects from forms with plain letters (i.e. characters on a standard keyboard) where the category names include diacritics.
You can see a list of redirected categories in Category:Wikipedia soft redirected categories.
Closing
When closing CfDs, document their results (e.g. with links to CfD page history) on the talk pages of the affected categories, if not deleted. If deleted, document the deletion decision in the deletion edit summary. See {{cfd top}}.
Special notes
When nominating a category, it's helpful to add a notice on the talk page of the most-closely related article. Doing so would not only extend an additional courtesy, but possibly also bring in editors who know more about the subject at hand. You can use {{Cfdnotice}} for this.
If a category is only used as generated by a template (e.g. Category:Foo Stubs to correspond with Template:Foo-stub), and that template is deleted by a regular WP:TFD process, then the category can be deleted as well as long as it was nominated along with the template, or mentioned early in the discussion.
Speedy renaming and merging
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 deletion, renaming, or merging, and to raise objections to the proposed change.
Categories that qualify for speedy deletion (per Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion, e.g. "patent nonsense", "recreation", categories that have been empty for four days) can be tagged with the regular speedy tags, such as {{db|reason}}
, and no delay is required to process these. Renaming under C2E can also be processed instantly as it is a variation on G7.
Contested requests become stale, and can be un-tagged and de-listed, after 7 days of inactivity. Optionally, if the discussion may be useful for future reference, it may be copied to the category talk page, with a section heading and {{moved discussion from|[[WP:CFDS]]|2=~~~~}}
. If the nominator wants to continue the process, they need to submit the request as a regular CfD in accordance with the instructions here.
Speedy criteria
The category-specific criteria for speedy deletion, renaming, or merging are strictly limited to:
C1. Unpopulated categories
- That have been unpopulated for at least four days. This does not apply to disambiguation categories, category redirects, featured topics categories, categories under discussion at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion (or other such discussions), or project categories that by their nature may become empty on occasion (e.g. Category:Wikipedians looking for help). Place {{Empty category}} at the top of the page to prevent such categories from being deleted.
- Tag category with {{Db-c1}}.
C2. Renaming or merging
-
- 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 article's name.
- Renaming a topic category to match its eponymous article (e.g. Category:The Beatles and The Beatles).
- This applies only if the related article'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 immediately following a page move discussion that had 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 28 days 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, but excludes an editor working with the author on the renaming.
- For C2A to C2E, tag category with {{subst:Cfr-speedy|New name}} and list on WP:CFDS. Administrators may implement C2E cases without delay.
For any categories that are not speedy candidates, use Wikipedia:Categories for discussion.
- 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 here}]] to [[:Category:{new name here}]] – {reason for rename here} ~~~~
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 14:16, 8 April 2016 (UTC). Currently, there are 108 open requests (. )
Current nominations
- Category:Wesley Girls High School Alumni to Category:People educated at Wesley Girls' Senior High School – Combination of C2D per Wesley Girls' Senior High School and C2C per Commonwealth naming practice which doesn't use alumnus for secondary education cats, specifically in concordance with Category:People educated by school in Uganda Le Deluge (talk) 14:11, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
- Category:St Helens Recs players to Category:St Helens Recreation RLFC players – C2D per St Helens Recreation RLFC Le Deluge (talk) 13:59, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
- Category:Algerian football clubs 1999–00 season to Category:Algerian football clubs 1999–2000 season – C2B Le Deluge (talk) 13:21, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
- Category:Nerlian urban settlement to Category:Nerl (urban-type settlement) – C2D per Nerl (urban-type settlement) Le Deluge (talk) 02:53, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
- Category:Tenhipalam to Category:Chelari – C2D per Chelari Le Deluge (talk) 17:59, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
- Category:Cognitive-Behavioral psychotherapists to Category:Cognitive-behavioral psychotherapists – C2A Le Deluge (talk) 17:11, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
- Category:Eurosonic to Category:Eurosonic Noorderslag – C2D per Eurosonic Noorderslag Le Deluge (talk) 17:01, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
- Category:Wikipedian CSK fans to Category:Wikipedian Chennai Super Kings fans – C2D with Chennai Super Kings and potential for confusion with Eastern European football teams with CSK in their names Le Deluge (talk) 15:45, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
- Category:History of the Illyrian Provinces to Category:Illyrian Provinces – C2C per many precedents, we do not keep History sub-cats for former territories. – Fayenatic London 01:13, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
- Category:Seasons in Serbia sport to Category:Seasons in Serbian sport – C2C: the adjective is used in that category tree, not the country name. HandsomeFella (talk) 17:15, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
- Category:Seasons in the Netherlands sport to Category:Seasons in Dutch sport – C2C: the adjective is used in that category tree, not the country name. HandsomeFella (talk) 17:12, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
- Category:Seasons in Czech Republic sport to Category:Seasons in Czech sport – C2C: the adjective is used in that category tree, not the country name. (Note: there is a soft redirect in the place of the proposed new name). HandsomeFella (talk) 17:06, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
- Category:Seasons in Czech Republic football to Category:Seasons in Czech football
- Category:Seasons in Czech Republic ice hockey to Category:Seasons in Czech ice hockey (Note: there is a soft redirect in the place of the proposed new name.)
- Category:Seasons in Croatia ice hockey to Category:Seasons in Croatian ice hockey – C2C: the adjective is used in that category tree, not the country name. HandsomeFella (talk) 15:45, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
- Category:Seasons in Kazakhstan ice hockey to Category:Seasons in Kazakhstani ice hockey – C2C: the adjective is used in that category tree, not the country name. HandsomeFella (talk) 15:39, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
- Category:2004–05 in Kazakhstan ice hockey to Category:2004–05 in Kazakhstani ice hockey
- Category:2005–06 in Kazakhstan ice hockey to Category:2005–06 in Kazakhstani ice hockey
- Category:2006–07 in Kazakhstan ice hockey to Category:2006–07 in Kazakhstani ice hockey
- Category:2007–08 in Kazakhstan ice hockey to Category:2007–08 in Kazakhstani ice hockey
- Category:2008–09 in Kazakhstan ice hockey to Category:2008–09 in Kazakhstani ice hockey
- Category:2009–10 in Kazakhstan ice hockey to Category:2009–10 in Kazakhstani ice hockey
- Category:2010–11 in Kazakhstan ice hockey to Category:2010–11 in Kazakhstani ice hockey
- Category:2011–12 in Kazakhstan ice hockey to Category:2011–12 in Kazakhstani ice hockey
- Category:2012–13 in Kazakhstan ice hockey to Category:2012–13 in Kazakhstani ice hockey
- Category:2013–14 in Kazakhstan ice hockey to Category:2013–14 in Kazakhstani ice hockey
- Category:2014–15 in Kazakhstan ice hockey to Category:2014–15 in Kazakhstani ice hockey
- Category:2015–16 in Kazakhstan ice hockey to Category:2015–16 in Kazakhstani ice hockey
- Category:Alumni of the China University of Mining and Technology to Category:China University of Mining and Technology alumni – C2C per other alumni cats Le Deluge (talk) 02:29, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
- Category:Delhi College of Engineering alumni to Category:Delhi Technological University alumni – C2D to match new name per Delhi Technological University, but should leave redirect for old name of institution Le Deluge (talk) 02:09, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
- Category:Tijuca to Category:Tijuca (bird) – C2D per Tijuca (bird) Good Ol’factory (talk) 02:08, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
- Category:Pitta to Category:Pittas – C2A, pluralize Good Ol’factory (talk) 02:06, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
- Category:Lanaria (bird genus) to Category:Linaria (bird genus) – C2A/C2D per Linaria (bird genus), spelling Good Ol’factory (talk) 01:54, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
- Category:Taiwanese Whisky to Category:Taiwanese whisky – C2A Le Deluge (talk) 01:43, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
- Category:Nigrita (genus) to Category:Nigrita (bird) – C2D per Nigrita (bird) Good Ol’factory (talk) 01:42, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
- Category:Hypargos to Category:Hypargos (bird) – C2D per Hypargos (bird) Good Ol’factory (talk) 01:41, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
- Category:Qing Dynasty provincial military commanders to Category:Qing dynasty provincial military commanders – C2A/C2C per Category:Qing dynasty people Le Deluge (talk) 00:50, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
- Category:Spokespeople for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People's Republic of China to Category:Spokespersons for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People's Republic of China – C2C per Category:Spokespersons Le Deluge (talk) 00:09, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
- Category:Heads of Government of Austria to Category:Heads of government of Austria – C2A, it's a generic descriptor to hold subcategories, not a formal title. Good Ol’factory (talk) 23:57, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
- Category:Military governors of Rehe to Category:Military governors of Rehe Province – C2D per Rehe Province Le Deluge (talk) 23:06, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
- Category:Qing Dynasty provincial governors to Category:Qing dynasty provincial governors – C2A/C2C per Category:Qing dynasty people Le Deluge (talk) 23:00, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
- Category:Qing Dynasty governors of Jiangsu to Category:Qing dynasty governors of Jiangsu – C2A/C2C per Category:Qing dynasty people Le Deluge (talk) 22:57, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
- Category:PLA National Defence University presidents to Category:Presidents of the PLA National Defence University C2C Le Deluge (talk) 22:31, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
Opposed nominations
- Category:Icelandic Wikipedians to Category:Icelander Wikipedians and Category:Wikipedians of Icelandic descent to Category:Wikipedians of Icelander descent – C2B - Icelandic is the language, Icelanders are the people. Probably worth leaving redirects in place. Le Deluge (talk) 14:52, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose "Icelandic" is appropriate here as these categories use the adjectival form. To give similar examples, people from the UK are Britons, but the appropriate category name is Category:British Wikipedians, not Category:Briton Wikipedians, whilst we have Category:Spanish Wikipedians not Category:Spaniard Wikipedians. Number 57 15:07, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
- Category:Rover engines to Category:Rover Company engines – C2B: per Rover Company/Category:Rover Company. Armbrust The Homunculus 22:27, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
-
- Oppose both: see below comments on Jaguar Cars. We need to distinguish the brand name from the company making the cars. HandsomeFella (talk) 11:56, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
- Category:Jaguar engines to Category:Jaguar Cars engines – C2B: per Jaguar Cars/Category:Jaguar Cars. Armbrust The Homunculus 22:25, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
-
- Oppose renaming of Category:Jaguar Formula One cars to Category:Jaguar Cars Formula One cars - the Formula One team was just known as "Jaguar", so the category name should remain as is. DH85868993 (talk) 11:14, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose all: agree with DH85868993; Jaguar Cars is the name of the company, it's not the brand name (despite the article saying so), "Jaguar" is, and the model names are like "Jaguar F-Type", not "Jaguar Cars F-Type". We need to distinguish the brand name from the company making the cars. HandsomeFella (talk) 11:56, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
- Category:Piaggio aircraft to Category:Piaggio Aerospace aircraft – C2B: per Piaggio Aerospace/Category:Piaggio Aerospace. Armbrust The Homunculus 22:19, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
-
- Oppose both: see above comments on Jaguar Cars. We need to distinguish the brand name from the company making the aircraft. HandsomeFella (talk) 15:41, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose both: Per WP:C2C (long-established tree naming convention}. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 09:05, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
- Category:Bertone vehicles to Category:Gruppo Bertone vehicles – C2B: per Gruppo Bertone/Category:Gruppo Bertone. Armbrust The Homunculus 22:12, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
-
- Oppose both: see above comments on Jaguar Cars. We need to distinguish the brand name from the company making the cars. HandsomeFella (talk) 12:00, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
- Category:Bandini vehicles to Category:Bandini Automobili vehicles – C2B: per Bandini Automobili/Category:Bandini Automobili. Armbrust The Homunculus 22:10, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
-
- Oppose: see above comments on Jaguar Cars. We need to distinguish the brand name from the company making the cars. HandsomeFella (talk) 12:00, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
- Concur with all oppose on this set of renames; this is a semantic confusion of the company and the product line's brand name. It's the same as trying to rename all "Windows" categories to use "Microsoft" instead of "Windows". — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼ 21:35, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
- Category:Academics by university to Category:Academics by university or college – C2C: as per Category:Faculty by university or college fgnievinski (talk) 04:04, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose rename, this should be upmerged and redirected to the main hierarchy category Category:Faculty by university or college. I think this could be done speedily as C2C. – Fayenatic London 00:02, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
- Agreed with the above oppose/upmerge/soft-redir; we don't need redundant micro-managing categorization like this that will just lead to definitional disputes and to more and more hair-splitting. What next? "Category:Adjunct professors at vocational colleges in Nebraska"? — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼ 21:35, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
- @Fgnievinski: do you object to the alternative proposal? – Fayenatic London 20:50, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
- No objections. fgnievinski (talk) 03:40, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
- @Fgnievinski: do you object to the alternative proposal? – Fayenatic London 20:50, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
- Category:Branches of thermodynamics to Category:Subfields of thermodynamics – C2C: As in rest of Category:Subfields by academic discipline. fgnievinski (talk) 02:49, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
- Category:Fields of seismology to Category:Subfields of seismology – C2C: As in rest of Category:Subfields by academic discipline. fgnievinski (talk) 02:48, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
- Category:Branches of psychology to Category:Subfields of psychology – C2C: As in rest of Category:Subfields by academic discipline. fgnievinski (talk) 02:48, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
- Category:Branches of philosophy to Category:Subfields of philosophy – C2C: As in rest of Category:Subfields by academic discipline. fgnievinski (talk) 02:46, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
- Category:Branches of meteorology to Category:Subfields of meteorology – C2C: As in rest of Category:Subfields by academic discipline. fgnievinski (talk) 02:45, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
- Category:Fields of mathematics to Category:Subfields of mathematics – C2C: As in rest of Category:Subfields by academic discipline. fgnievinski (talk) 02:45, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
- Category:Linguistics disciplines to Category:Subfields of linguistics – C2C: As in rest of Category:Subfields by academic discipline. fgnievinski (talk) 02:45, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
- Category:Branches of immunology to Category:Subfields of immunology – C2C: As in rest of Category:Subfields by academic discipline. fgnievinski (talk) 02:44, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
- Category:Fields of history to Category:Subfields of history – C2C: As in rest of Category:Subfields by academic discipline. fgnievinski (talk) 02:44, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
- Category:Branches of geography to Category:Subfields of geography – C2C: As in rest of Category:Subfields by academic discipline. fgnievinski (talk) 02:44, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
- Category:Forensic disciplines to Category:Subfields of forensics – C2A: As in rest of Category:Subfields by academic discipline. fgnievinski (talk) 02:44, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
- Category:Fields of finance to Category:Subfields of finance – C2C: As in rest of Category:Subfields by academic discipline. fgnievinski (talk) 02:43, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
- Category:Economics by specialty to Category:Subfields of economy – C2C: As in rest of Category:Subfields by academic discipline. fgnievinski (talk) 02:43, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
- Category:Areas of computer science to Category:Subfields of computer science – C2C: As in rest of Category:Subfields by academic discipline. fgnievinski (talk) 02:43, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
- Category:Branches of botany to Category:Subfields of botany – C2C: As in rest of Category:Subfields by academic discipline. fgnievinski (talk) 02:43, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
- Category:Branches of biology to Category:Subfields of biology – C2C: As in rest of Category:Subfields by academic discipline. fgnievinski (talk) 02:42, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
- Category:Astronomical sub-disciplines to Category:Subfields of astronomy – C2A: As in rest of Category:Subfields by academic discipline. fgnievinski (talk) 02:42, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
- Category:Archaeological sub-disciplines to Category:Subfields of archaeology – C2C: As in rest of Category:Subfields by academic discipline. fgnievinski (talk) 02:41, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose speedy There is no clear convention for the proposed format in Category:Subfields by academic discipline, and therefore C2C doesn't apply. Armbrust The Homunculus 18:44, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
- Of course there is: the convention of of the parent category, which features the keyword "Subfields", not any of "sub-disciplines", "disciplines", "branches", "fields", or "areas". fgnievinski (talk) 01:16, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
- Clear convention means almost every category in uses the proposed format in the tree. Currently, however, only 8 of the 32 subcategories of Category:Subfields by academic discipline uses the "Subfields of FOO" format, so it's not a clear convention. Armbrust The Homunculus 13:37, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
- Of course there is: the convention of of the parent category, which features the keyword "Subfields", not any of "sub-disciplines", "disciplines", "branches", "fields", or "areas". fgnievinski (talk) 01:16, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
- Support it's simply citing the wrong criterion; we normalize subcat names to parentcat names absent an unusual reason not to. No prejudice against a later and larger CfR on the whole tree to use one convention consistently. This one should be done per WP:COMMONSENSE anyway, since "branches" is a vernacularism; people actually in academic disciplines/fields don't call them "branches" (or "areas" for that matter; "areas" means topical scopes of focus/specialization by individuals or groups, and "branches" doesn't really mean anything). — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼ 21:35, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose speedy There is no clear convention for the proposed format in Category:Subfields by academic discipline, and therefore C2C doesn't apply. Armbrust The Homunculus 18:44, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
- Category:Kosovar Turks to Category:Kosovo Turks – C2D. Zoupan 21:28, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose speedy for Category:Kosovar Turks only. Only recently moved and without discussion, therefore C2D doesn't apply. Armbrust The Homunculus 17:52, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
- It was bold, see the talk page, hits favour the new name.--Zoupan 18:18, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
- @Zoupan:, it may have been a good bold move, but it doesn't matter how good any of us thinks the move was -- recent bold moves are ineligible for C2D. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 01:14, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
- It was bold, see the talk page, hits favour the new name.--Zoupan 18:18, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose speedy for Category:Kosovar Turks only. Only recently moved and without discussion, therefore C2D doesn't apply. Armbrust The Homunculus 17:52, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
- Category:Plymouth vehicles to Category:Plymouth (automobile) vehicles – C2B: per Plymouth (automobile)/Category:Plymouth (automobile). Armbrust The Homunculus 09:31, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
- Category:Plymouth concept vehicles to Category:Plymouth (automobile) concept vehicles
- Oppose these two as clumsy and unnecessary. The main article needs disambiguating, but these don't. – Fayenatic London 13:37, 4 February 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose: We do not apply parenthetical disambiguations in category-space if they're not needed. The resulting name would also be redundant to the point of browbeating the reader. Our readers are not morons, and they know that we don't have a category for something as trivially absurd as cars that happen to be in a place in Massachusetts. — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼ 21:35, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
- Category:Plymouth concept vehicles to Category:Plymouth (automobile) concept vehicles
On hold pending other discussion
- Category:Persecution by early Christians to Category:Persecution of pagans in the late Roman Empire - C2D per Persecution of pagans in the late Roman Empire. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:54, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
-
- Oppose the proposed name. Agree that it should change but not to this. "Persecution" is too POV. Wait until the main article has been through a rename proposal that I will initiate. Laurel Lodged (talk) 15:44, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
-
- @Laurel Lodged: This nomination moved to section "On hold pending other discussion". Marcocapelle (talk) 19:05, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
Moved to full discussion
- Category:Railway stations served by Northern Rail to Category:Railway stations served by Northern - C2D in line with operator change on 1 April 2016 from Northern Rail (Serco-Abellio) to Northern (train operating company) 7ten (talk) 02:40, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
- This is ambiguous. I suggest Category:Railway stations served by Northern (train operating company) to match the parent article, Northern (train operating company). --Redrose64 (talk) 19:23, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
- It is not ambiguous. It has the phrase "railway stations" in the title and a link to Northern (train operating company) on the category page. There is no need to further complicate or lengthen the title. Category:Railway stations served by Northern is perfect as proposed. Rcsprinter123 (interface) 19:41, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
- It's ambiguous because it could easily refer to any of these. I should mention that Rcsprinter123 (talk · contribs) has been pre-emptively recategorising pages from Category:Railway stations served by Northern Rail to Category:Railway stations served by Northern. --Redrose64 (talk) 19:51, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
- The link on the page is sufficient. Rcsprinter123 (reason) 20:00, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
- @Rcsprinter123: @Redrose64: I have moved this to a full discussion here and have moved the articles back to the original category pending the discussion result. Good Ol’factory (talk) 04:06, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
- The link on the page is sufficient. Rcsprinter123 (reason) 20:00, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
- It's ambiguous because it could easily refer to any of these. I should mention that Rcsprinter123 (talk · contribs) has been pre-emptively recategorising pages from Category:Railway stations served by Northern Rail to Category:Railway stations served by Northern. --Redrose64 (talk) 19:51, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
- It is not ambiguous. It has the phrase "railway stations" in the title and a link to Northern (train operating company) on the category page. There is no need to further complicate or lengthen the title. Category:Railway stations served by Northern is perfect as proposed. Rcsprinter123 (interface) 19:41, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
- This is ambiguous. I suggest Category:Railway stations served by Northern (train operating company) to match the parent article, Northern (train operating company). --Redrose64 (talk) 19:23, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
- Category:Synchronised swimming in China to Category:Synchronized swimming in China per C2C NB: Category:Chinese synchronized swimmers uses "Z" Hugo999 (talk) 09:01, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose Per WP:RETAIN AusLondonder (talk) 22:37, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
- Support: RETAIN pertains to article content not categories, and it only applies anyway when the change would be arbitrary and has no real rationale (C2C is a rationale). — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼ 21:35, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
- Comment: agree with SMcCandlish. HandsomeFella (talk) 14:39, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
-
- Category:Synchronised swimming competitions Brazil to Category:Synchronized swimming competitions in Brazil per C2A,C NB: Category:Brazilian synchronized swimmers uses "Z" Hugo999 (talk) 01:39, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
- Category:Synchronised swimming in Brazil to Category:Synchronized swimming in Brazil
-
- Oppose both Per WP:RETAIN AusLondonder (talk) 22:37, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
- Support both per comment above. RETAIN is not a magic wand that disappears other concerns. It's a default when there are no other concerns. And it doesn't apply in this namespace to begin with. [Note: The MOS:TIES part of MOS:ENGVAR can be relevant here, but it is not in this case other than we favor US spellings for W. Hemisphere topics, except where there's a strong British or Canadian tie.] — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼ 21:35, 17 March 2016 (UTC) Clarified. — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼ 01:50, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
- Comment: agree with SMcCandlish. HandsomeFella (talk) 14:39, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
- Moved both above to a full discussion.
- Unfortunately nationalistic spelling obsessions is taking place here. I would never dream of trying to eradicate American English spelling in the way others are doing with British English spelling. No credible reason is being presented as to why WP:RETAIN is not relevant here AusLondonder (talk) 03:01, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
- To have one spelling within the country categories for Brazil and China (which both required changing for other reasons) Hugo999 (talk) 03:17, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) @AusLondonder:, you mean nationalist spelling stuff taking place like ... going RM to RM opposing all moves that have anything to do with alleged spelling differences between UK and US English, so desperately that one injects bogus rationales in all of them, clouding the discussion with noise? (This is not actually a UK vs. US English matter to begin with. Read Oxford spelling – ize is perfectly acceptable in British/Commonwealth English, just as in Canadian, especially in an academic/formal register, which is what WP is written in. The only English dialect that insists on one spelling is American, and it's not ise, so the ENGVAR question is entirely moot.) — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼ 01:50, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
- I'm not sure I would say "-ise" vs "-ize" is entirely moot as far as ENGVAR questions are concerned. I've seen so many consensus decisions where the adoption of "-ise" is done explicitly on ENGVAR grounds, right or wrong. That said, it's true that "-ize" is the older, more original form of English and is not a result of Webster's Americanism simplifications, as in the case of many other ENGVAR issues, so it is a somewhat different case. Good Ol’factory (talk) 02:26, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
-
- Kind of an "WP:OTHERCRAPHAPPENED" point, though. >;-) How many of those discussions included any discussion of Oxford spelling? I concede "irrelevant" was hyperbolic. ENGVAR would be relevant for an -ise → -ize move if the topic had strong American ties. It shouldn't carry much weight the other way around, because -ize is okay in British/Commonwealth English. — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼ 02:38, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
- "-ize" is OK in British English, but it's questionable whether it is preferred (or more popular), which is probably the more salient issue. As much as proponents of Oxford style wish it ruled the isles, it doesn't always. I'm involved in academic publishing, and all UK journals I deal with, save those published by Oxford University, demand the "-ise" spelling. Good Ol’factory (talk) 02:52, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
- Kind of an "WP:OTHERCRAPHAPPENED" point, though. >;-) How many of those discussions included any discussion of Oxford spelling? I concede "irrelevant" was hyperbolic. ENGVAR would be relevant for an -ise → -ize move if the topic had strong American ties. It shouldn't carry much weight the other way around, because -ize is okay in British/Commonwealth English. — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼ 02:38, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
- Whatever you say, @SMCCandlish: the facts are clear. -ise remains overwhelmingly preferred in India, Ireland, Australia, New Zealand and the United Kingdom (plus many smaller countries). The European Union uses -ise. The Australian newspaper goes so far as to rename the World Health Organization to the World Health Organisation in its coverage. The Indian government will obviously have to rename Central Organisation for Modernisation of Workshops, Coal Mines Provident Fund Organisation, Petroleum and Explosives Safety Organisation, Federation of Indian Export Organisations, India Trade Promotion Organisation, Defence Research and Development Organisation and also of course the Indian Space Research Organisation. All at your command. AusLondonder (talk) 03:17, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
- The -ise spelling is preferred in news style and fiction, the -ize in formal/academic publishing. Which kind is Wikipedia? I'm not arguing, of course, that the -ise spelling should be expunged; it's an acceptable and common variant outside the US, and yes, it's more common in less formal writing like newspapers. People simply have to stop treating ENGVAR as if it said "you can pick US or UK English only, and there is one an only one way to spell, punctuate or do anything in each of these dialects". It doesn't indicate anything like that, and it would be dead wrong if it did. On average I'll support an -ize to -ise move if the subject is British, Australian, Indian, etc. (not Canadian), but only if there are not countervailing reasons against it, like divergence from the rest of a consistent category (some categories consistently use one or the other depending on ENGVAR, some use only one spelling regardless of the country, and either system is okay, just not a mishmash), or no strong ties and someone just like -ise better. — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼ 02:38, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
- "The -ise spelling is preferred in news style and fiction, the -ize in formal/academic publishing." This is not my experience. As I mentioned above, I'm involved in academic publishing, and all UK journals I deal with, save those published by Oxford University, demand the "-ise" spelling. Good Ol’factory (talk) 07:33, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
- The -ise spelling is preferred in news style and fiction, the -ize in formal/academic publishing. Which kind is Wikipedia? I'm not arguing, of course, that the -ise spelling should be expunged; it's an acceptable and common variant outside the US, and yes, it's more common in less formal writing like newspapers. People simply have to stop treating ENGVAR as if it said "you can pick US or UK English only, and there is one an only one way to spell, punctuate or do anything in each of these dialects". It doesn't indicate anything like that, and it would be dead wrong if it did. On average I'll support an -ize to -ise move if the subject is British, Australian, Indian, etc. (not Canadian), but only if there are not countervailing reasons against it, like divergence from the rest of a consistent category (some categories consistently use one or the other depending on ENGVAR, some use only one spelling regardless of the country, and either system is okay, just not a mishmash), or no strong ties and someone just like -ise better. — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼ 02:38, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
-
- I'm not sure I would say "-ise" vs "-ize" is entirely moot as far as ENGVAR questions are concerned. I've seen so many consensus decisions where the adoption of "-ise" is done explicitly on ENGVAR grounds, right or wrong. That said, it's true that "-ize" is the older, more original form of English and is not a result of Webster's Americanism simplifications, as in the case of many other ENGVAR issues, so it is a somewhat different case. Good Ol’factory (talk) 02:26, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
- Unfortunately nationalistic spelling obsessions is taking place here. I would never dream of trying to eradicate American English spelling in the way others are doing with British English spelling. No credible reason is being presented as to why WP:RETAIN is not relevant here AusLondonder (talk) 03:01, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
- Moved both above to a full discussion.
- Category:Organisations based in Hyderabad, India to Category:Organisations based in Hyderabad – C2C AusLondonder (talk) 09:11, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
-
- Oppose There is a city in Pakistan by the same name.Shyamsunder (talk) 11:06, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
- Category:Crime in Hyderabad, India to Category:Crime in Hyderabad – C2C AusLondonder (talk) 09:10, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
-
- Oppose There is a city in Pakistan by the same name.Shyamsunder (talk) 11:06, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
- Moved to full discussion AusLondonder (talk) 22:17, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose There is a city in Pakistan by the same name.Shyamsunder (talk) 11:06, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
- Category:PATH stations to Category:PATH (rail system) stations
- Category:PATH stations in New Jersey to Category:PATH (rail system) stations in New Jersey
- Category:PATH stations in New York to Category:PATH (rail system) stations in New York
- Oppose no disambiguation needed — Preceding unsigned comment added by Djflem (talk • contribs)
- Moved to a full discussion. Good Ol’factory (talk) 03:37, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose no disambiguation needed — Preceding unsigned comment added by Djflem (talk • contribs)
- Category:New Jersey Transit stations to Category:NJ Transit stations
- Category:Proposed New Jersey Transit stations to Category:Proposed NJ Transit stations
- Oppose, name should include train or rail stations since NJT also operates light rail and bus stations and this category does not include them — Preceding unsigned comment added by Djflem (talk • contribs)
- Moved to a full discussion. Good Ol’factory (talk) 03:21, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose, name should include train or rail stations since NJT also operates light rail and bus stations and this category does not include them — Preceding unsigned comment added by Djflem (talk • contribs)
- Category:Proposed New Jersey Transit stations to Category:Proposed NJ Transit stations
- Category:Pacific Electric Railway to Category:Pacific Electric – C2D per Pacific Electric Good Ol’factory (talk) 03:08, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
- Category:Pacific Electric Railway templates to Category:Pacific Electric templates
- Category:Pacific Electric Railway succession templates to Category:Pacific Electric succession templates
- Oppose — confusing, reads like an electric utility company name instead of a public transit company name. Regards — Look2See1 t a l k → 00:57, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
- Moved to a full discussion. Good Ol’factory (talk) 02:20, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose — confusing, reads like an electric utility company name instead of a public transit company name. Regards — Look2See1 t a l k → 00:57, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
- Category:United Kingdom European Union membership referendum to Category:United Kingdom European Union membership referendum, 2016 – C2D per United Kingdom European Union membership referendum, 2016 Good Ol’factory (talk) 02:24, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose Reverted undiscussed move. Armbrust The Homunculus 18:33, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
- It was changed back to include the year (by another user). Including the year is consistent with the relevant naming guideline in Wikipedia:Naming conventions (government and legislation). Good Ol’factory (talk) 03:22, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
- Moved to a full discussion. Good Ol’factory (talk) 01:42, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
- It was changed back to include the year (by another user). Including the year is consistent with the relevant naming guideline in Wikipedia:Naming conventions (government and legislation). Good Ol’factory (talk) 03:22, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose Reverted undiscussed move. Armbrust The Homunculus 18:33, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
- Category:Helsingin Energia to Category:Helen Oy – C2D per Helen Oy. Good Ol’factory (talk) 23:04, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose. "Oy" is a company form and shall not be used in article (or category) names; see WP:NCCORP. --Gwafton (talk) 23:15, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
- @Gwafton: It is being used in the article name of Helen Oy. These company forms may be used when disambiguation is needed. This is such a case, since "Helen" is ambiguous. What would be the rationale for using the former name of a presently existing company? Good Ol’factory (talk) 23:27, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
- The company form should be avoided if possible, no matter that the main article fails following this guideline. I suggest renaming it Category:Helen (company) instead. --Gwafton (talk) 16:05, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
- That sounds like a personal preference and not something suggested by the guidelines. The article name has not failed to follow WP:NCCORP. WP:NCCORP explicitly recommends using company forms as a form of disambiguation. Good Ol’factory (talk) 22:33, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
- Moved to full discussion. Good Ol’factory (talk) 22:40, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
- That sounds like a personal preference and not something suggested by the guidelines. The article name has not failed to follow WP:NCCORP. WP:NCCORP explicitly recommends using company forms as a form of disambiguation. Good Ol’factory (talk) 22:33, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
- The company form should be avoided if possible, no matter that the main article fails following this guideline. I suggest renaming it Category:Helen (company) instead. --Gwafton (talk) 16:05, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
- @Gwafton: It is being used in the article name of Helen Oy. These company forms may be used when disambiguation is needed. This is such a case, since "Helen" is ambiguous. What would be the rationale for using the former name of a presently existing company? Good Ol’factory (talk) 23:27, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose. "Oy" is a company form and shall not be used in article (or category) names; see WP:NCCORP. --Gwafton (talk) 23:15, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
- Category:Five Towns, New York to Category:Five Towns – C2D: per Five Towns. Armbrust The Homunculus 10:45, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose. The new title is ambiguous. It is surprising that the head article is not disambiguated, but regardless of that choice, this ambiguous categ name would lead to miscategorisation. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 11:02, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
-
- Moved to full discussion. Armbrust The Homunculus 10:23, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
- Category:Late Antiquity and Medieval sites in Kosovo to Category:Historic sites in Kosovo – C2C: per Category:Historic sites by country. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:28, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose speedy due conflict with C2D (the main article of the category is Late Antiquity and Medieval sites in Kosovo). Armbrust The Homunculus 10:03, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
- Now at full discussion. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:47, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose speedy due conflict with C2D (the main article of the category is Late Antiquity and Medieval sites in Kosovo). Armbrust The Homunculus 10:03, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
- Category:Mitsubishi Motors concepts to Category:Mitsubishi Motors concept vehicles – C2C: per the convention in Category:Concept automobiles. Armbrust The Homunculus 09:35, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
- Category:Jeep concept automobiles to Category:Jeep concept vehicles
- Category:GM Korea concept automobiles to Category:GM Korea concept vehicles
- Category:General Motors concept automobiles to Category:General Motors concept vehicles
- Hang on. Are any of the contents not cars (automobiles)? The main article is concept car and has been for years, after a brief undiscussed move to concept vehicle. If all the contents are cars, then I suggest putting these four on hold pending a full nomination of the top category and all the hierarchy. – Fayenatic London 13:37, 4 February 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose Good point by Fayenatic. But there is another separate issue: the head category is Category:Concept automobiles, and instead of trying to adopt that format per C2C, this nomination is trying to rename the pages away from that format. It seems that these categories could be standardised in at least 2 different directions, so a full discussion is required. I suggest a group nom with several pre-pack options, as I did a week ago with the subcats of broadcasting by country. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs)
- @BrownHairedGirl: The Category:Concept automobiles format couldn't be "adopt"ed per C2C, because most subcategories don't use that. Armbrust The Homunculus 10:40, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
- Sorry, my wording was clumsy. What I mean is that there is a prima facie C2C case for following the head category. As you note, that would fail on other grounds.
The point is that either way, there seems to be no speediable change available here. This needs a full discussion. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 10:50, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
- Sorry, my wording was clumsy. What I mean is that there is a prima facie C2C case for following the head category. As you note, that would fail on other grounds.
- @BrownHairedGirl: The Category:Concept automobiles format couldn't be "adopt"ed per C2C, because most subcategories don't use that. Armbrust The Homunculus 10:40, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose Good point by Fayenatic. But there is another separate issue: the head category is Category:Concept automobiles, and instead of trying to adopt that format per C2C, this nomination is trying to rename the pages away from that format. It seems that these categories could be standardised in at least 2 different directions, so a full discussion is required. I suggest a group nom with several pre-pack options, as I did a week ago with the subcats of broadcasting by country. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs)
- Now at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2016 February 18#Category:Concept automobiles. – Fayenatic London 21:54, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
- Hang on. Are any of the contents not cars (automobiles)? The main article is concept car and has been for years, after a brief undiscussed move to concept vehicle. If all the contents are cars, then I suggest putting these four on hold pending a full nomination of the top category and all the hierarchy. – Fayenatic London 13:37, 4 February 2016 (UTC)
- Category:Kosovan dramatists and playwrights to Category:Kosovar dramatists and playwrights – C2C. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 00:33, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
- Category:Kosovan essayists to Category:Kosovar essayists
- Category:Kosovan ethnographers to Category:Kosovar ethnographers:
- Oppose - Kosov(an) as per proper English. We have categories with both versions Kosovan and Kosovar as well, but Kosovan is more English native word. (I.e. Kosovan Passport, Kosovan parliamentary election, 2014, etc). It would be great if we move all categories "Kosovar..." -> "Kosovan...", not the other way around.--Mondiad (talk) 05:33, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
- More and more, "Kosovar" is a reference to the ethnicity (ethnic Albanians), while "Kosovan" is the more inclusive term for the nationality. I'm not sure how well accepted the distinction is at this stage, but maybe it's time to again consider renaming Category:Kosovar people. At minimum, a good argument could be made that "Kosovar" is the more ambiguous option, in that it can refer to a nationality and an ethnicity. Good Ol’factory (talk) 05:52, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
- @Good Ol’factory+Mondiad: my only concern here is consistency, and I don't know much about the topic. You two both make a good case for a renaming in the other direction, which wouldn't be speediable ... so if I do a group nom of Kosovar→Kosovan people categories, and ping you both, would you be kind enough to expand at CFD on your explanations here? --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 10:27, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
- Sure, just ping me after you do the nomination.--Mondiad (talk) 19:12, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
- OK. I would be fine with this rename going through and then a larger nomination for all the Kosovar categories, but however you want to proceed is probably OK ... Good Ol’factory (talk) 21:38, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
- Moved to full discussion by nominator. Armbrust The Homunculus 11:05, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
- @Good Ol’factory+Mondiad: my only concern here is consistency, and I don't know much about the topic. You two both make a good case for a renaming in the other direction, which wouldn't be speediable ... so if I do a group nom of Kosovar→Kosovan people categories, and ping you both, would you be kind enough to expand at CFD on your explanations here? --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 10:27, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
- More and more, "Kosovar" is a reference to the ethnicity (ethnic Albanians), while "Kosovan" is the more inclusive term for the nationality. I'm not sure how well accepted the distinction is at this stage, but maybe it's time to again consider renaming Category:Kosovar people. At minimum, a good argument could be made that "Kosovar" is the more ambiguous option, in that it can refer to a nationality and an ethnicity. Good Ol’factory (talk) 05:52, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose - Kosov(an) as per proper English. We have categories with both versions Kosovan and Kosovar as well, but Kosovan is more English native word. (I.e. Kosovan Passport, Kosovan parliamentary election, 2014, etc). It would be great if we move all categories "Kosovar..." -> "Kosovan...", not the other way around.--Mondiad (talk) 05:33, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
- Category:MediaCorp to Category:Mediacorp – C2D per Mediacorp. Was previously opposed here b/c the article was moved without discussion, but it appears to me to have been a non-controversial move with no objections Good Ol’factory (talk) 22:47, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose speedy Sorry, but C2D explicitly requires a discussion. An unopposed technical request is not a discussion. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 05:18, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
- Unless someone can articulate a substantive (ie, nonprocedural) reason that the rename should be opposed, to insist on a full discussion pretty much flies in the face of WP:BURO. Good Ol’factory (talk) 08:10, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
- I'd like to agree Good Ol’factory, but WP:BURO has its limits, esp when it comes to consensus-forming processes. For example, there have been some recent big rows over the early closure of AFDs, and previous bustups over speedy actions which stretched or broke the criteria.
There may be a case for widening C2D, but until a change is agreed, this doesn't fit. A single categ is easy to list at a full CFD, using Twinkle, so it's not a huge burden. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 01:11, 10 February 2016 (UTC)- If there's no substantive case to be made for why it should not be renamed, then moving it to a full discussion is a waste of time, whether that waste is small or large. This always happens on this page with users who seem to enjoy enforcing process over substance. And every time these types of discussions get moved, they end up being processed as nominated. I don't know of a single exception, and I doubt that this will be one either. (The waste or time comes not with the effort required to nominate it for a full discussion, but the loss of the advantage of the speedy process—the category will thus remain at a name that is different than its main article for at least a week, and possibly much longer, given the amount of time it takes for many CFD discussions to be closed.) Good Ol’factory (talk) 05:07, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
- Moved to full discussion (under protest). Good Ol’factory (talk) 05:18, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
- If there's no substantive case to be made for why it should not be renamed, then moving it to a full discussion is a waste of time, whether that waste is small or large. This always happens on this page with users who seem to enjoy enforcing process over substance. And every time these types of discussions get moved, they end up being processed as nominated. I don't know of a single exception, and I doubt that this will be one either. (The waste or time comes not with the effort required to nominate it for a full discussion, but the loss of the advantage of the speedy process—the category will thus remain at a name that is different than its main article for at least a week, and possibly much longer, given the amount of time it takes for many CFD discussions to be closed.) Good Ol’factory (talk) 05:07, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
- I'd like to agree Good Ol’factory, but WP:BURO has its limits, esp when it comes to consensus-forming processes. For example, there have been some recent big rows over the early closure of AFDs, and previous bustups over speedy actions which stretched or broke the criteria.
- Unless someone can articulate a substantive (ie, nonprocedural) reason that the rename should be opposed, to insist on a full discussion pretty much flies in the face of WP:BURO. Good Ol’factory (talk) 08:10, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose speedy Sorry, but C2D explicitly requires a discussion. An unopposed technical request is not a discussion. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 05:18, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
- Category:Plymouth, Devon to Category:Plymouth – C2D: To match main article DuncanHill (talk) 22:20, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose, categories need to be unambiguous unless there is a very definite primary topic. – Fayenatic London 23:33, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
- Is that an actual policy? Wikipedia:Categorization says to follow standard naming conventions. Doesn't mention anything about raising the bar of primacy. Jolly Ω Janner 01:40, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
- Support Per C2D and WP:CAT AusLondonder (talk) 08:54, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
- @Jolly Janner: Oppose speedy The current name of the category was chosen in this full discussion, which can't be overturned by a speedy nomination. Also as Category:Plymouth shows, it's extremely ambiguous. Armbrust The Homunculus 09:27, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
- Is it really true that a speedy cannot overturn a discussion? The criteria on this page do not list it, but simply mention the article needs long standing notability, which Plymouth has. Jolly Ω Janner 10:14, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
- Common sense dictates that we can't speedy against the result of a discussion, unless some change in the situation would make it seem that many of the users in that discussion would have changed their minds. If the article had, at the time, been at Plymouth, Devon, then the article being renamed would be such a change. I don't see any relevant change related to this category. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 10:32, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks, Od Mishehu. Discussion moved to Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2016 February 3#Category:Plymouth, Devon. Jolly Ω Janner 12:12, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
- Common sense dictates that we can't speedy against the result of a discussion, unless some change in the situation would make it seem that many of the users in that discussion would have changed their minds. If the article had, at the time, been at Plymouth, Devon, then the article being renamed would be such a change. I don't see any relevant change related to this category. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 10:32, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
- Is it really true that a speedy cannot overturn a discussion? The criteria on this page do not list it, but simply mention the article needs long standing notability, which Plymouth has. Jolly Ω Janner 10:14, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
- Is that an actual policy? Wikipedia:Categorization says to follow standard naming conventions. Doesn't mention anything about raising the bar of primacy. Jolly Ω Janner 01:40, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose, categories need to be unambiguous unless there is a very definite primary topic. – Fayenatic London 23:33, 2 February 2016 (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.
Categories possibly emptied out of process
Note. Categories listed here will be automatically moved to Category:Candidates for speedy deletion after 96 hours.
Note. Due to limits of the software, all contents of the category may not be displayed. View the category directly to see all contents.
|