Misplaced Pages

:Categories for discussion/Speedy - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages:Categories for discussion

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Nathan B2 (talk | contribs) at 23:18, 15 January 2017 (Form). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 23:18, 15 January 2017 by Nathan B2 (talk | contribs) (Form)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Deletion discussions
Articles
Templates and modules
Files
Categories
Redirects
Miscellany
Speedy deletion
Proposed deletion
Shortcut

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 Misplaced Pages:Criteria for speedy deletion, e.g. "patent nonsense", "recreation", categories that have been empty for seven 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|]|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.

Shortcut
  • 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 Misplaced Pages naming conventions and practices.

Shortcut

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 Misplaced Pages:Category names.

Shortcut
  • 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.

Shortcut
  • 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 explicit consensus to rename was reached at a page move discussion. 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.

Shortcut
  • 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.


  • 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: 

* ] to ] – 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 22:37, 25 December 2024 (UTC). Currently, there are 192 open requests (refresh).

Do not use the "Move" tab to move categories listed here!
Categories are processed following the 48-hour discussion period and are moved by a bot.

Current nominations

Comment: the two Königsberg churches seem to be Lutheran (not Reformed) churches. The others, the Berlin Cathedral, Bad Homburg”, the “English Evangelical church in New York” and St Pauls in Kentucky are all described as “Evangelical” Hugo999 (talk) 11:31, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

Opposed nominations

Following my successful CFD nomination for "Populated waterside places" (the first entry at Misplaced Pages:Categories for discussion/Log/2016 December 8), which covered all child categories with "populated places" in the name, I was instructed to bring all affected categories here. Here's the list:

Extended content

This is basically C2C, because CFD has established a new naming convention for the tree. However, it's not exactly a normal CFDS, since I just came here as a technically simple place to get the CFD result enforced; I don't think we ought to accept any objections. Nyttend (talk) 01:54, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

  • Oppose. The nominator Nyttend is right: this is not C2C, because the de facto convention remains in place. These categories should have included in the full CFD discussion in December, so that all affected categories were tagged for the attention of readers. CFD/S is for upholding existing naming conventions, not to function as a backdoor for avoiding a CFD listing of 200 categories. These need a full discussion, and tagging all 200 categories for that full discussion will hopefully gather more participation than the single !vote at the previous discussion. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 02:32, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
    • @BrownHairedGirl: Really? I thought that as RM on a topic page is sufficient authority for a C2D category move, so a CfD consensus at the top of a hierarchy is sufficient for C2C moves further down. I've processed many such cases listed here in the past, e.g. "visitor attractions" to "tourist attractions" (renaming of that hierarchy is ongoing). – Fayenatic London 22:48, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
      • @Fayenatic london: I haven't seen that done before, and I certainly don't approve of it. It's not what CFD/S criteria say.
        I was going to say that it doesn't even save any work, because it's just as easy to use AWB to tag the categs for full CFD as for speedy ... but then I checked Nyttend's category recent contribs, and these categories don't appear. I checked a sample of the individual category pages, and found no speedy tags.
        I dispute the right of a CFD closer to pronounce actions in respect of categories which were neither listed nor tagged in the nomination, but regardless of the merits of your close, Nyttend has gone way out-of-line here, and far exceeded your closing instructions, by ignoring CFD/S rules: untagged categories listed at CFD/S, objection ignored without comment, 48 hour CFD/S waiting period ignored by implementing the moves only 46 minutes after listing them, and by doing all this as a WP:INVOLVED admin. See User talk:Nyttend#Waterside_places_categories (permalink) for a defiantly hostile response to my request for a revert. <sad> --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 01:39, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
  • "Populated coastal places" sounds much more idiomatic to me than "coastal populated places". I don't have a good explanation at hand for why, but it does. A more standard example of the same phenomenon would be that you would always talk about a "big red ball", never a "red big ball". According to the scale on this web page, "coastal" should be very late in the adjective ordering, in the "nationality/origin" position. You might think that "populated" would be even later, in the "purpose" position, but my feeling is that it fits better into the catch-all "opinion" slot, which goes before all the other adjectives. —David Eppstein (talk) 02:30, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
  • @David Eppstein: I don't have a view on the substantive merits of the renaming, and this is not the place to discuss them. My objection here is procedural.
    Firstly, that a CFD closer does not have the right to dictate the use of CFD/S to bypass a full CFD, and these categories do not meet CFD/S criterion C2C.
    And secondly that no editor or admin seeking to use CFD/S even in that way has a right to ignore CFD/S rules by a) not tagging the categs; b) ignoring objections without acknowledgement; c) ignoring the 48-hour wait period by implementing the moves only 46 minutes after listing them; d) to do all that as a WP:INVOLVED admin acting in respect of a CFD which they had themselves initiated. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 03:26, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
  • @BrownHairedGirl and Nyttend: I agree with most of what BrownHairedGirl has written here. Apologies for my part in setting this off. I would have given Nyttend more guidance on using CFDS if I had realised that he was unfamiliar with the process (being more active on Commons, I gather). Certainly the nominated category pages need to be tagged, and certainly they must wait 48 hours before processing. Moreover, if there is opposition on any grounds, then they should not be processed speedily, unless that opposition is withdrawn.
It has become accepted practice to speedily rename subcats following a CFD, where the changes appear uncontroversial, citing C2C, even though that is not exactly within the criteria as currently written. Recent examples are São Paulo (city) to São Paulo, accepted by Timrollpickering, and visitor attractions to tourist attractions, accepted by Od Mishehu (and again by Timrollpickering). Now that this practice has been questioned, I suggest we need a discussion on changes to the criteria.
As for the categories nominated here, now that speedy renaming has been opposed (both on procedure by BrownHairedGirl and on merits by David Eppstein), they need to go to a full CFD. I suggest that this should present "Option A" and "Option B", either to approve the nomination, or to reverse the Dec 8 CFD. – Fayenatic London 21:53, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
  • @Fayenatic london: thanks for that. I agree that a fresh CFD is the way forward, and your proposed option A/B format seems like the best way to do it, because it guarantees a consistent outcome for all the categs involved.
    I know that you acted in the utmost good faith in suggesting a CFD/S followup (tho I think that doing so after a CFD with only 1 !vote was less wise), but since there is a disagreement on whether that is an appropriate way to proceed, may I suggest an RFC to resolve it? Then whatever the outcome of the RFC, this page's header can be updated to note the consensus on what is currently a grey area. (FWIW, my own view is that using CFD/S as a phase 2 of a full CFD impedes consensus-formation by depriving editors of notifications of the full discussion, and is also pointless because it saves no work -- all the tagging and listing still has to be done anyway. But let's see what an RFC concludes.)
    As To Nyttend, I really don't think that you need take any responsibility for lack of hand-holding. Nyttend is an editor of ten years standing and an admin for nine years, so the community has every right to expect that when using an unfamiliar process they read the instructions and follow them, rather than pre-emptively dismissing both the instructions and the objections. The responsibility for that lies with Nyttend, not you. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 11:56, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Oppose – to my UK ear 'Populated coastal place' sounds better. I'm not quite sure why 'Populated place' should be thought to be a compound noun, as opposed to 'coastal place'. Nyttend's actions have been egregious. Oculi (talk) 14:27, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
On hold pending other discussion
  • None currently
Moved to full discussion

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 Misplaced Pages:Categories for discussion/Working/Manual.

Categories: